Opinion ID: 2598178
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Role of the Jury

Text: ¶ 62 This court's decision respects both the constitutional role and the assumed abilities of juries. The right of jury trial: is no mere procedural formality, but a fundamental reservation of power in our constitutional structure. Just as suffrage ensures the people's ultimate control in the legislative and executive branches, jury trial is meant to ensure their control in the judiciary. State v. Evans, 154 Wash.2d 438, 445, 114 P.3d 627 (2005) (quoting Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 305-06, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004)). Juries embody the commonsense judgment of the community. Taylor v. Louisiana, 419 U.S. 522, 530, 95 S.Ct. 692, 42 L.Ed.2d 690 (1975). Only with the greatest reluctance and with clearest cause should judgesparticularly those on appellate courtsconsider second-guessing jury determinations or jury competence. As Judge Learned Hand wrote, Juries are not leaves swayed by every breath. United States v. Garsson, 291 F. 646, 649 (D.N.Y. 1923). ¶ 63 There was no explicit statement of opinion on the credibility of the defendants or victims by these witnesses and no objections at trial (for tactical reasons). Thus, there were no manifest constitutional errors in either Kirkman's or Candia's case.