HANDBOOK 

FOR TRIAL

JURORS

SERVING IN 

THE

UNITED STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURTS
Prepared for the use of trial jurors 

serving in the United States district courts 

under the supervision of the Judicial 

Conference of the United States. Published 

by the Administrative Office of the 

United States Courts, Washington, D.C. 

20544. www.uscourts.gov
CONTENTS

PURPOSE OF THIS HANDBOOK ............. 1

IMPORTANCE OF JURY SERVICE ............. 1

THE COURTS........................................... 2

THE CRIMINAL CASE............................... 3

THE CIVIL CASE ...................................... 4

THE VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION............... 4

THE JURORS’ SOLEMN OATH.................. 6

THE EIGHT STAGES OF TRIAL ................. 6

THE ARGUMENTS OF COUNSEL ............. 8

THE CHARGE TO THE JURY..................... 8

THE JURY’S VERDICT .............................. 9

COURTROOM ETIQUETTE ...................... 9

CONDUCT OF THE JURY DURING THE 

TRIAL.....................................................10

IN THE JURY ROOM .............................. 13

AFTER THE TRIAL ................................. 14

CONCLUSION........................................ 14

PURPOSE OF THIS HANDBOOK

 The purpose of this handbook is to 

acquaint trial jurors with the general nature 

and importance of their role as jurors. It 

explains some of the language and procedures 

used in court, and it offers some suggestions 

helpful to jurors in performing this important 

public service.

 Nothing in this handbook is to be 

regarded by jurors as instructions of law to 

be applied by them in any case in which they 

serve. The judge will instruct the jury in each 

separate case as to the law of that case. For 

example, in each criminal case, the judge 

will tell the jury, among other things, that a 

defendant charged with a crime is presumed 

to be innocent and the burden of proving 

his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is upon 

the Government. Jurors must follow only the 

instructions of law given to them by the trial 

judge in each particular case.

IMPORTANCE OF JURY SERVICE

 Jurors perform a vital role in the American 

system of justice. The protection of our rights 

and liberties is largely achieved through the 

teamwork of judge and jury who, working 

together in a common effort, put into practice 

the principles of our great heritage of freedom. 

The judge determines the law to be applied in 

the case while the jury decides the facts. Thus, 

in a very important way, jurors become a part 

of the court itself.

 Jurors must be men and women of sound 

judgment, absolute honesty, and a complete 

sense of fairness. Jury service is a high duty 

of citizenship. Jurors aid in the maintenance 

of law and order and uphold justice among 

their fellow citizens. Their greatest reward is 

the knowledge that they have discharged this 

1
duty faithfully, honorably, and well. In addition 

to determining and adjusting property rights, 

jurors may also be asked to decide questions 

involving a crime for which a person may 

be fined, placed on probation, or confined 

in prison. In a very real sense, therefore, the 

people must rely on jurors for the protection 

of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

THE COURTS

 In this country, there are two systems of 

courts. They are the courts of the individual 

50 states and the District of Columbia and the 

courts of the Federal Government. This book is 

written for jurors selected to serve in the trial 

court of the Federal Government, the United 

States District Court. The types of cases that 

can be brought in this court have been fixed 

by the United States Congress according to our 

Federal Constitution.

 Cases in the United States District Courts 

are divided into two general classes. These are 

called criminal cases and civil cases.

 Criminal cases are those in which 

individuals or organizations are charged with 

breaking the criminal laws. Typical criminal 

charges in a federal court are those involving 

violation of the federal income tax and 

narcotics laws, mail theft, and counterfeiting.

 Civil cases are suits in which persons who 

disagree over their rights and duties come into 

court to settle the matter. A typical example of 

a civil case is one involving a broken contract. 

One party may claim that it should be paid 

under the terms of the contract, while the 

other side may assert a defense to the claim, 

such as the lack of a binding contract. The 

court is asked to decide who is right. This 

depends on the law as laid down by the judge 

and the facts as decided by the jury.

2
THE CRIMINAL CASE

 The person charged with a violation of the 

law is the defendant. The charge against the 

defendant may be brought in two ways. One 

way is by means of an indictment; the other is 

by an information. 

 An indictment is a written accusation by 

a grand jury that charges the defendant with 

committing an offense against the law. Each 

offense charged will usually be set forth in a 

separate count of the indictment.

 An information is the name given to a 

written charge against the defendant filed 

by the United States Attorney and not by 

the grand jury. But even in cases where the 

defendant has the right to have a grand jury 

consider the charges presented, the defendant 

may agree to give up this right and consent to 

the filing of an information.

 After the indictment or information is 

filed, the defendant appears in open court 

where the court advises the defendant of the 

charge and asks whether the defendant pleads 

“guilty” or “not guilty.” This procedure is 

called the arraignment.

 No trial is needed if the defendant pleads 

guilty and admits to committing the crime. But 

if the defendant pleads not guilty, he or she 

will then be placed on trial.

 The judge in a criminal case tells the jury 

what the law is. The jury must determine what 

the true facts are. On that basis, the jury has 

only to determine whether the defendant is 

guilty or not guilty of each offense charged. 

The subsequent sentencing is the sole 

responsibility of the judge. In other words, in 

arriving at an impartial verdict as to guilt or 

innocence of a jury defendant, the jury is not 

to consider a sentence.

3
 The jury must consider separately each of 

the charges against the defendant, after which 

it may find the person: not guilty of any of the 

charges, guilty of all the charges, or guilty of 

some of the charges and not guilty of others.

THE CIVIL CASE

 The following is an example of the kind 

of civil case jurors in a United States District 

Court will help decide.

 Let us call the case John Smith v. XY 

Company. This means that John Smith has 

filed a case against the XY Company.

 John Smith is called the plaintiff, the 

person who begins the case. The XY Company 

is the defendant. The plaintiff and the 

defendant are the parties.

 The plaintiff, John Smith, states his 

claim in a paper called the complaint. The 

defendant, XY Company, replies to the 

complaint in a paper called the answer. The 

complaint and the answer are the main 

pleadings in the case. The points in the 

pleadings about which the parties disagree 

make up the issues of fact and law. Sometimes 

these issues are set forth in a pretrial order. 

This is an order drawn up by the judge after 

consulting with the attorneys for the parties.

THE VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION

 To begin a jury trial, a panel of 

prospective jurors is called into the courtroom. 

This panel will include a number of persons 

from whom a jury will be selected to try the 

case. In criminal trials, alternate jurors may be 

chosen to take the place of jurors who become 

ill during the trial.

 The panel members are sworn to 

answer questions about their qualifications 

to sit as jurors in the case. This questioning 

4
process is called the voir dire. This is an 

examination conducted by the judge and 

sometimes includes participation by counsel. 

A deliberately untruthful answer to any fair 

question could result in serious punishment to 

the person making it.

 The voir dire examination opens with a 

short statement about the case. The purpose is 

to inform the jurors what the case is about and 

to identify the parties and their lawyers.

 Questions are then asked to find out 

whether any individuals on the panel have 

any personal interest in the case or know 

of any reason why they cannot render an 

impartial verdict. The court also wants to 

know whether any member of the panel is 

related to or personally acquainted with the 

parties, their lawyers, or the witnesses who 

will appear during trial. Other questions will 

determine whether any panel members have 

a prejudice or a feeling that might influence 

them in rendering a verdict. Any juror having 

knowledge of the case should explain this to 

the judge.

 Parties on either side may ask that a 

member of the panel be excused or exempted 

from service on a particular jury. These 

requests, or demands, are called challenges.

 A person may be challenged for cause 

if the examination shows he or she might be 

prejudiced. The judge will excuse an individual 

from the panel if the cause raised in the 

challenge is sufficient. There is no limit to the 

number of challenges for cause, which either 

party may make.

 The parties also have a right to a 

certain number of challenges for which 

no cause is necessary. These are called 

peremptory challenges. Each side usually 

has a predetermined number of peremptory 

5
challenges. The peremptory challenge is a 

legal right long recognized by law as a means 

of giving both sides some choice in the makeup of a jury. Jurors should clearly understand 

that being eliminated from the jury panel by 

a peremptory challenge is no reflection upon 

their ability or integrity.

 In some courts, the peremptory 

challenges are made openly in the hearing 

of the jury. In others, they are made from the 

jury list out of the jury’s sight.

THE JURORS’ SOLEMN OATH

 After the voir dire is completed, the jurors 

selected to try the case will be sworn in. The 

judge or the clerk will state to the jury:

“Members of the Jury, you will rise, hold up 

your right hands, and be sworn to try this 

case.”

 The jurors then rise and hold up their 

right hands. The jurors face the judge or 

the clerk who is to administer the oath. 

That official slowly, solemnly, and clearly 

repeats the oath. The jurors indicate by their 

responses and upraised hands that they take 

this solemn oath.

 Jurors not wishing to take an oath may 

request to affirm instead of swear. In some 

districts the jury is sworn upon the Bible and 

not by uplifted hand.

THE EIGHT STAGES OF TRIAL

 The trial proceeds when the jury has been 

sworn. There are usually eight stages of trial in 

civil cases. They are:

(1) The lawyers present opening 

statements. Sometimes the opening 

statements on behalf of one or more 

parties are omitted.

6
(2) The plaintiff calls witnesses and 

produces evidence to prove its case.

(3) The defendant may call witnesses 

and produce evidence to disprove 

the plaintiffs’ case and to prove the 

defendant’s claims.

(4) The plaintiff may call rebuttal 

witnesses to disprove what was said 

by the defendant’s witnesses.

(5) Closing arguments are made by the 

lawyer on each side.

(6) The judge instructs or charges the 

jury as to the law.

(7) The jury retires to deliberate.

(8) The jury reaches its verdict.

 During the trial, witnesses called by either 

side may be cross-examined by the lawyers on 

the other side.

 Throughout the trial, the judge may be 

asked in the presence of the jury to decide 

questions of law. Usually these questions 

concern objections to testimony that either 

side wants to present. Occasionally, the 

judge may ask jurors to leave the courtroom 

briefly while the lawyers present their legal 

arguments for and against such objections. 

The law requires that the judge decide such 

questions.

 A ruling by the judge does not indicate 

that the judge is taking sides. He or she is 

merely saying, in effect, that the law does, 

or else does not, permit that question to be 

asked.

 It is possible that the judge may decide 

every objection favorably to the plaintiff 

or the defendant. That does not mean the 

case should be decided by the jury for the 

plaintiff or the defendant. Even where the 

7
judge decides every objection favorably to 

the plaintiff or the defendant, the jury should 

maintain its objectivity and base its verdict 

strictly upon the testimony and exhibits 

received in evidence at trial.

 The juror takes an oath to decide the case 

“upon the law and the evidence.” The law is 

what the presiding judge declares the law to 

be; not what a juror believes it to be or what a 

juror may have heard it to be from any source 

other than the presiding judge. The evidence 

that jurors consider consists of the testimony

of witnesses and the exhibits admitted in 

evidence. What evidence is proper for the jury 

to consider is based upon the law of evidence.

THE ARGUMENTS OF COUNSEL

 After presentation of the evidence is 

completed, the lawyers have the opportunity 

to discuss the evidence in their closing 

arguments. This helps the jurors recall 

testimony that might have slipped their 

memory.

 The chief purpose of the argument 

is to present the evidence in logical and 

comprehensible order. The lawyers fit the 

different parts of the testimony together and 

connect up the facts. 

 Each attorney presents the view of the 

case that is most favorable to his or her own 

client. Each lawyer’s side appears to be right 

to that lawyer. Each lawyer’s statement may 

be balanced by the statement of the lawyers 

on the other side.

THE CHARGE TO THE JURY

 The charge of a judge to a jury in a 

United States District Court frequently is much 

more than a statement of the rules of law. 

Sometimes it may contain a summary of the 

8
facts or some of the facts.

 It is the jury’s duty to reach its own 

conclusion based on the evidence. The verdict 

is reached without regard to what may be the 

opinion of the judge as to the facts, though as 

to the law the judge’s charge controls.

 The judge may point out and may also 

explain basic facts in dispute, and facts that do 

not actually matter in the case. In other words, 

the judge may try to direct the jury’s attention 

to the real merits of the case and impartially 

summarize the evidence bearing on the 

questions of fact. The judge will state the law 

related to the facts presented to the jury.

THE JURY’S VERDICT

 In both civil and criminal cases, it is the 

jury’s duty to decide the facts in accordance 

with the principles of law laid down in the 

judge’s charge to the jury. The decision is 

made on the evidence introduced, and the 

jury’s decision on the facts is usually final.

COURTROOM ETIQUETTE

 A court session begins when the court 

official raps for order. Everyone in the court 

rises. The judge takes his or her place on the 

bench, and the court official announces the 

opening of court. A similar procedure is used 

when court adjourns.

 Common courtesy and politeness are 

safe guides as to the way jurors should act. 

Of course, no juror will be permitted to read a 

newspaper or magazine in the courtroom. Nor 

should a juror carry on a conversation with 

another juror in the courtroom during the trial.

 Jurors will be treated with consideration 

for their comfort and convenience. They 

should bring to the attention of the judge 

any matter affecting their service and should 

9
notify the court of any emergencies. In the 

event of a personal emergency, a juror may 

send word to the judge through any court 

personnel, or may ask to see the judge 

privately.

CONDUCT OF THE JURY DURING 

THE TRIAL

 Jurors should give close attention to the 

testimony. They are sworn to disregard their 

prejudices and follow the court’s instructions. 

They must render a verdict according to their 

best judgment.

 Each juror should keep an open mind. 

Human experience shows that once persons 

come to a preliminary conclusion as to a 

set of facts, they hesitate to change their 

views. Therefore, it is wise for jurors not 

to even attempt to make up their mind on 

the facts of a case until all the evidence has 

been presented to them, and they have been 

instructed on the law applicable to the case. 

Similarly, jurors should not discuss the case 

even among themselves until it is concluded.

 During the trial, the jury may hear 

references to the rules of evidence. Some of 

these rules may appear strange to a person 

who is not a lawyer. However, each rule 

has a purpose. The rules have evolved from 

hundreds of years of experience in the trial of 

cases.

 The mere fact that a lawsuit was begun 

is not evidence in a case. The opening and 

closing statements of the lawyers are not 

evidence. A juror should disregard any 

statements made by a lawyer in argument 

that have not been proved by the evidence. A 

juror should also disregard any statement by 

a lawyer as to the law of the case if it is not in 

accord with the judge’s instructions.

10
 Jurors are expected to use all the 

experience, common sense, and common 

knowledge they possess. But they are not to 

rely on any private source of information. 

Thus, they should be careful during the trial 

not to discuss the case at home or elsewhere. 

Information that a juror gets from a private 

source may be only half true, or biased or 

inaccurate. It may be irrelevant to the case at 

hand. At any rate, it is only fair that the parties 

have a chance to know and comment on all 

the facts that matter in the case.

 If during the trial a juror learns elsewhere 

of some fact about the case, he or she should 

inform the court. The juror should not 

mention any such matter in the jury room. 

 Individual jurors should never inspect 

(either in person or via Internet websites) the 

scene of an accident or of any event in the 

case. If an inspection is necessary, the judge 

will have the jurors go as a group to the scene.

 Jurors must not talk about the case 

with others not on the jury, even their 

spouses or families, including via electronic 

communications and social networking on 

computers, netbooks, tablets, and smart 

phones. Jurors must not read about the 

case in the newspapers or on the Internet. 

They should avoid radio, television, and 

Internet broadcasts that might mention the 

case. Jurors should not conduct any outside 

research, including but not limited to, 

consulting dictionaries or reference materials, 

whether in paper form or on the Internet. 

Jurors may not use any of the following to 

obtain information about the case, about 

case processes or legal terms, or to conduct 

any research about the case: any electronic 

device or media, such as a telephone, cell 

phone, smart phone, or computer; the 

Internet, any Internet service, or any text 

11
or instant messaging service, RSS feed, or 

other automatic alert that may transmit 

information regarding the case to the juror; 

or any Internet chat room, blog, or website, 

to communicate to anyone information about 

the case. The Sixth Amendment’s guarantee 

of a trial by an impartial jury requires that a 

jury’s verdict must be based on nothing else 

but the evidence and law presented to them 

in court. The words of Supreme Court Justice 

Oliver Wendell Holmes from over a century 

ago apply with equal force to jurors serving 

in this advanced technological age: “The 

theory of our system is that the conclusions to 

be reached in a case will be induced only by 

evidence and argument in open court, and not 

by any outside influence, whether of private 

talk or public print.” 

 Breaking these rules is likely to confuse a 

juror. It may be hard to separate in one’s mind 

the court testimony and reports coming from 

other sources.

 Jurors should not loiter in the corridors 

or vestibules of the courthouse. Embarrassing 

and/or improper contacts may occur there 

with persons interested in the case. If juror 

identification badges are provided, they should 

be worn in the courthouse at all times.

 If any outsider attempts to talk with a 

juror about a case in which he or she is sitting, 

the juror should do the following:

(1) Tell the person it is improper for a 

juror to discuss the case or receive 

any information except in the 

courtroom.

(2) Refuse to listen if the outsider 

persists.

(3) Report the incident at once to the 

judge.

12
 Jurors have the duty to report to the judge 

any improper behavior by any juror. They 

also have the duty to inform the judge of any 

outside communication or improper conduct 

directed at the jury by any person.

 Jurors on a case should refrain from 

talking on any subject—even if it is not related 

to the matter being tried—with any lawyer, 

witness, or party in the case. Such contact 

may make a new trial necessary, at significant 

additional expense to the parties, the court, 

and ultimately, taxpayers. 

 Some cases may arouse much public 

discussion. In that event, the jury may be 

kept together until the verdict is reached. This 

procedure is used to protect the jurors against 

outside influences.

IN THE JURY ROOM

 In some districts, the judge selects the 

foreperson of the jury. In other districts, the 

jurors elect their foreperson, and in still other 

districts, the first juror to enter the jury box 

becomes the foreperson automatically. The 

judge will inform jurors which method is used 

in the district.

 The foreperson presides over the jury’s 

deliberations and must give every juror a fair 

opportunity to express his or her views.

 Jurors must enter the discussion with 

open minds. They should freely exchange 

views. They should not hesitate to change their 

opinions if the deliberations have convinced 

them they were wrong initially.

 In a criminal case, all jurors must agree 

on the verdict. This is also required in a civil 

case, unless the jury is otherwise instructed by 

the court.

 The jurors have a duty to give full 

13
consideration to the opinion of their fellow 

jurors. They have an obligation to reach a 

verdict whenever possible. However, no juror 

is required to give up any opinion which he or 

she is convinced is correct.

 It would be dishonest for a judge to 

decide a case by tossing a coin. It would be 

just as dishonest for a juror to do so.

 The members of the jury are sworn to 

pass judgment on the facts in a particular case. 

They have no concern beyond that case. They 

violate their oath if they render their decision 

on the basis of the effect their verdict may 

have on other situations.

AFTER THE TRIAL

 After the jurors return their verdict and 

are dismissed by the judge, they are free to go 

about their normal affairs, although in some 

districts jurors must check with jury office 

personnel to see if their service is concluded. 

They are under no obligation to speak to 

any person about the case and may refuse 

all requests for interviews or comments. 

Nevertheless, the court may enter an order in 

a specific case that during any such interview, 

jurors may not give any information with 

respect to the vote of any other juror.

CONCLUSION

 To decide cases correctly, jurors must be 

honest and intelligent. They must have both 

integrity and good judgment. The continued 

vitality of the jury system depends on these 

attributes.

 To meet their responsibility, jurors must 

decide the facts and apply the law impartially. 

They must not favor the rich or the poor. 

They must treat alike all men and women, 

corporations and individuals. Justice should be 

14
rendered to all persons without regard to race, 

color, religion, or sex.

 The performance of jury service is 

the fulfillment of a high civic obligation. 

Conscientious service brings its own reward 

in the satisfaction of an important task well 

done. There is no more valuable work that 

the average citizen can perform in support 

of our Government than the full and honest 

discharge of jury duty.

 The effectiveness of the democratic 

system itself is largely measured by the 

integrity, the intelligence, and the general 

quality of citizenship of the jurors who serve in 

our courts.

15
Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts

Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building

One Columbus Circle, N.E.

Washington, D.C. 20544

www.uscourts.gov

HB100 (Rev. 8/12)