Wasted time main complaint of jurors

Kim Smith

Thursday, Oct. 31, 2002 | 11:30 a.m.

When a committee formed by the Nevada Supreme Court earlier this year began asking people how the jury system could be improved, they kept hearing the same thing over and over again.

Jurors were tired of arriving to court on time only to wait 30 or 45 minutes before they were called into the courtroom. They didn't like taking 10-minute bathroom breaks that ended up being an hour when attorneys thought up something new to argue about.

Today, the Jury Improvement Commission, which received input from lawyers, former jurors, judges and the general public during a series of public hearings, is releasing a long list of recommendations that will address that issue and many others.

Depending upon their nature, the recommendations will be passed along to the Nevada Supreme Court, the Legislature and the Eighth Judicial District for possible implementation.

"This is really a valuable service that has been done for the citizens of Nevada," said committee member and Chief District Judge Mark Gibbons. "I believe it was a worthwhile experience and hopefully the Nevada Supreme Court will approve all of the recommendations."

Among the recommendations is the proposed adoption of a Jurors' Bill of Rights.

The No. 1 "right" states that "a juror's time is precious. Delays in jury selection and the progress of the trial should be avoided whenever possible and when delays are unavoidable, they should be minimized."

One of the most extreme examples of wasted jury time cited during the study was the Margaret Rudin trial. Rudin was accused of murdering her husband in December 1994. What was supposed to be a three-week trial lasted 10 weeks.

Exhibits weren't marked ahead of time, defense attorney Michael Amador was consistently berated for arriving to court late and he also asked for a week's extension in the middle of the trial saying he was ill-prepared.

Moreover, while most legal issues are settled ahead of time, lengthy motions were argued almost every day -- forcing jurors to sit outside the courtroom for hours, waiting.

"The committee is trying to send a message to not let lawyers get away with arguing for hours, that judges are the gatekeepers and they need to utilize the jurors' time in the best way possible," Gibbons said.

Another "right" states that jurors ought to be "reasonably compensated" for their service.

One of the recommendations that must be approved by the Legislature involves increasing juror pay from $15 a day to $40 a day by eliminating a $9 fee paid to those jurors who come to court only to not be selected.

According to the study, the county would save about $224,000 a year if the idea was implemented.

Another recommendation that would have a dramatic effect on jurors is the implementation of a four-day trial week. Instead of arguing pre-trial legal issues every morning and conducting trials in the afternoons, the commission recommends holding trials four days a week and hearing legal arguments on the fifth day.

The idea is that by putting in six or seven hours into a trial four days a week, trials will be finished much faster than if they were held four hours a day.

The county's top prosecutor and defense attorneys agree the idea has merit.

"I think anything you can do to make jurors experience less inconvenience is a good thing," District Attorney Stewart Bell said. "They want to be here the fewest days possible and they want to get back to their real lives."

Deputy Public Defender Marcus Cooper said he can't think of any reason why such a program couldn't work.

"I'm all for ensuring jurors' time is spent productively," Cooper said.

Special Public Defender Phil Kohn said the system worked well when he was practicing in El Dorado County, Calif.

"It was a very good way to do business and it was a very good thing for the jurors, who are giving up their time and not earning much money while they're at it," Kohn said.

The men did not agree on the jury pay issue. Kohn and Bell said it was a step in the right direction and Cooper said he believes jury duty is a civic duty one should be happy to perform regardless of pay.

"It's ridiculous for us to pay jurors as little as we do, especially for those people who work in the casino industry who lose so much when they serve as jurors," Kohn said. "We've got to make it more fair."

While Kohn said he appreciates the sentiment of the committee overall, he personally believes a Jurors' Bill of Rights is unnecessary.

"The Bill of Rights was created to tell government what it can not do and we forget that," Kohn said. "The fact that they're telling me everyone needs to be treated with courtesy is silly. We don't need a Bill of Rights to do that. We should do it because it's the right thing to do. Those jurors who are not treated with respect by a judge can voice their opinion at the ballot box."

Among the other recommendations that will be released today: