>Jury selection in Kentucky involves the careful evaluation of potential jurors. The defense and prosecution generally have differing priorities, and a judge must also consider whether someone could act appropriately as a juror. All parties will scrutinize the personal beliefs of jurors, and decisions to remove people from jury selection sometimes create legal controversies. In one out-of-state case, a defense attorney challenged a judge's dismissal of a potential juror for cause and received a decision from the state's highest court.
The defense attorney had been representing an African-American man accused of trafficking in cocaine. During jury selection, the judge disqualified a woman who expressed her view that the system treated African-American men unfairly. Although she had added that she would act impartially as a juror, the judge deemed her a bad fit for the jury despite the defense attorney's protests. A jury later went on to convict the defendant.
The defendant's attorney tried to overturn the decision based on the interference during jury selection, but the state's highest court upheld the conviction. The ruling, however, acknowledged that prospective jurors' worldviews should not be cause for automatic dismissal because people cannot simply shed their life experiences that form their opinions. Judges should instead focus on a potential juror's preconceived ideas about the case because these specific opinions could represent a valid reason to excuse that person.
When a criminal case goes to trial, a defense attorney will strive to build a jury sympathetic to the defendant or receptive to criminal defense strategies. This will happen during the process that is referred to as voir dire.