Opinion ID: 683531
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: district court's dismissal of a prospective juror

Text: 77 Jensen contends that his right to a fair trial under the Sixth Amendment was violated when the district court erred in sua sponte dismissing a prospective juror because the court found her not competent to be on the jury. The Sixth Amendment guarantees a criminal defendant the right to a trial by impartial jury and the trial judge is entrusted with the implementation of this guarantee. United States v. Hinojosa, 958 F.2d 624, 631 (5th Cir.1992). We will not disturb a trial court's determinations of impartiality absent a clear abuse of discretion. Id. 78 During voir dire, the follow colloquy transpired: 79 [COURT:] Now, I want to make absolutely sure that I've covered anything that you want to tell me about whether or not you should be on the jury. Sometimes I may fail to ask questions that somebody may have a concern in their mind. I'm going to ask the lawyers to come back up. And if any of you have anything you want to tell me in confidence at the bench about whether or not you should serve on this jury now is your time just to come up. I'm talking about personal feelings, publicity, business reasons, just any other reason. If there's anything at all if you would just raise your hand and just come up to the bench. 80 (Side bar) 81 THE COURT: Just come right up here? 82 A JUROR: This building, I can't handle the air in this building. 83 THE COURT: The air? 84 A JUROR: Smokers I tried to get--except they didn't do it. 85 THE COURT: You seem to be having trouble since we got here today? 86 A JUROR: Yes, it is worse. 87 THE COURT: Today? 88 A JUROR: Because of the cold air. I'm not used to cold air on me. 89 THE COURT: I'm just going to excuse you from further jury service. 90