Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01873/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01873-16/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Jesse Trevino asserts that Bakersfield Police Officer Ryan Miller used excessive force in the 

course of detaining him. 

The matter is set for jury trial on July 26, 2016. From previous discussions with counsel and the 

motion to continue filed by the plaintiff (Doc. 77), it appears the plaintiff wishes to use a jury 

questionnaire because of concerns that there may be prospective jurors on the panel who have strong 

feelings about police officers—whether pro-police or anti-police—and who either will be unwilling to 

state the opinions in open court or who will state them in a manner that will inhibit others from stating 

their opinions or will “contaminate” the jury pool. (Doc. 82) 

The defendants contend that a juror questionnaire is not necessary because all jury panels 

include those with negative feelings about law enforcement. Id. at 2. While this is true, the Court is 

sensitive to the plaintiff’s concerns in light of recent events. On the other hand, the Court agrees with 

the defendants that the juror questionnaire proposed by the plaintiff seems to seek to be a substitute for 

JESSE TREVINO,

 Plaintiff,

v.

CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:14-cv-001873 - JLT

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST TO 

USE OF THE JUROR QUESTIONNAIRE AS 

MODIFIED BY THE COURT

(Doc. 82)

Case 1:14-cv-01873-JLT Document 83 Filed 07/22/16 Page 1 of 3
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

oral examination; that is not the Court’s intention. Rather, the Court intends the questionnaire only to 

identify those jurors who lack the ability to be fair and impartial and who may be reluctant to express 

these views in open court. Thus, the Court has constructed its own questionnaire, attached hereto. The 

questionnaire is not a substitute for full voir dire but is intended only to alert the Court to those 

prospective jurors who should be examined, at least in part, outside of the presence of fellow jurors.

The Court anticipates that by using the questionnaire the Court can ensure fairness by those selected to 

sit on the jury and will cause only minimal delay.

Thus, the plaintiff’s request to use a jury questionnaire is GRANTED in PART and the 

plaintiffs’ objections are OVERRRULED in PART. Any objections or proposed changes to the jury 

questionnaire drafted by the Court may be filed by no later than Saturday, July 23, 2016. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 22, 2016 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-01873-JLT Document 83 Filed 07/22/16 Page 2 of 3
3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Juror Questionnaire

This case involves allegations that a Bakersfield Police Officer used excessive force when 

attempting to detain a person.

To assist the parties and the Court in making jury selection as efficient as possible, please 

answer the following questions:

1. Do you have any strong feelings about police officers that would make it impossible for you to

be fair in this case (whether because you favor the police, because you disfavor the police or for any 

other reason)?

Yes_____ No_____ If yes, please explain: 

2. Do you have any strong feelings about people detained by police that would make it impossible 

for you to be fair in this case?

Yes_____ No_____ If yes, please explain: 

3. Do you have any strong feelings about recent events (in which police officers killed people who 

were being detained or arrested or recent events in which police officers were killed by suspects) that

would make it impossible for you to be fair in this case? 

Yes_____ No_____ If yes, please explain: 

I declare under penalty of perjury according to the laws of the State of California, that the foregoing is 

true and correct.

Print your full name: _________________________________________

Signature: __________________________________________________

Case 1:14-cv-01873-JLT Document 83 Filed 07/22/16 Page 3 of 3