JURIES;

You asked if there is data on whether prosecuting people who fail to respond to jury summonses increases summons response rates.

We found no study that examined this specific issue. Several have found that response rates increase substantially when courts send follow-up letters that threaten non-appearing jurors with legal action, but none has measured whether actually imposing fines or jail sentences has further improved these rates. Tom Munsterman of the National Center for State Courts, who tracks this topic, reports that while all states have laws authorizing fines or short jail terms for no-show jurors, few actively follow up. He points out that many juror summonses are sent to wrong addresses and that many of the people who actually receive a summons but disregard it have valid reasons for not serving.

Judges and jury administrators in some states have rejected recommendations to prosecute non-appearing jurors. Some ascribe to the view that “reluctant jurors make bad jurors. ” Others observe that such policies would result in prosecuting many people who did not actually receive their summons or would have been excused from jury service if they had responded. They also express concern about the cost of this enforcement strategy – locating the non-responsive jurors, proving that they received a summons, and taking court time to discipline them.

A 1998 report from the American Judicature Society recommends a selective enforcement policy, coordinated with local media so that a small number of cases are prosecuted and publicized. Its author reports that the jury administrator and citizen surveys he conducted show that sending follow-up mailings to no-show jurors and, when necessary, requiring them to attend show-cause hearings and penalizing them substantially increases summons response rates. He suggests that selective enforcement is the most cost effective means of demonstrating to the public that there is a penalty for non-response (Robert G. Boatwright, Improving Citizen Response to Jury Summonses: A Report with Recommendations). We did not find data from any court that has implemented this recommendation.

SP-L: eh