skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 202473 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: Nullification at Work? A Glimpse From the National Center for State Courts Study of Hung Juries
Journal: Chicago-Kent Law Review  Volume:78  Issue:3  Dated:2003  Pages:1249-1277
Author(s): Paula L. Hannaford-Agor; Valerie P. Hans
Date Published: 2003
Page Count: 29
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
Washington, DC 20531
Grant Number: 98-IJ-CX-0048
Dataset: DATASET 1
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This article discusses jury nullification.
Abstract: Jury nullification permits a small minority of citizens to invalidate, in the context of a particular case, laws that have been established through the legislative process. It permits a single individual to temporarily thwart the imposition of the law on a criminal defendant by deadlocking the jury and forcing a mistrial. Jury nullification happens when juries, or individual members of the jury, vote to acquit the defendant although the jurors believe that the defendant is guilty under the law. Public views about the legitimacy of jury nullification are ambivalent. An in-depth study was conducted of 372 felony trials in 4 large, urban courts. Using surveys of judges, attorneys, and jurors, case characteristics were examined, as well as interpersonal dynamics during deliberations, and juror demographics and attitudes. The cases in which the jury reached a verdict were compared to cases in which the jury deadlocked on 1 or more charges. A detailed case study was conducted on the 46 cases from the sample in which the jury hung on one or more charges. The results revealed three critical aspects of felony jury trials that are related to the likelihood that a jury will hang: (1) the evidentiary characteristics of the case; (2) the interpersonal dynamics of deliberations; and (3) jurors’ opinions about the fairness of the law as applied during the trial. Multivariate analyses as well as the case studies component confirmed that all three of these aspects contribute to the likelihood of jury deadlock, although not necessarily in all jurisdictions. The fact that juror concerns about the fairness of a particular law was a significant predictor of hung juries deserves greater attention. In contrast to those that fear rampant jury nullification of the law, jurors in these felony trials gave generally positive ratings about both legal fairness and outcome fairness. Evidentiary factors are particularly important in both acquittal juries and hung juries. The dynamics of jury deliberations are strong influences in hung juries. The combination of so many variables makes it unlikely that jury nullification plays a dominant role in the large majority of cases. 131 footnotes
Main Term(s): Jury decisionmaking; Jury nullification instructions
Index Term(s): Acquittals; Behavior patterns; Decisionmaking; Juror characteristics; Jury research; Trial procedures; Verdict prediction
Note: Dataset may be archived by the NIJ Data Resources Program at the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.