This law section simply gives the official name of a chapter, which is 'Trial Jury Selection and Management Act.'

This law emphasizes that jury trials are an important part of the Constitution, and serving as a juror is a duty for all citizens. It mandates that jurors must be chosen randomly from the local population, and everyone who is eligible must have an equal chance to be selected. The law also states that jury commissioners need to handle jury systems fairly, efficiently, and responsibly.

This law explains that the rules for picking jurors and creating trial juries are applied to all cases, civil or criminal, in every trial court across the state.

This law explains that there are three types of juries: grand juries, which are involved in investigating criminal conduct; trial juries, which decide the outcome in a court case; and juries of inquest, which are used in specific situations to investigate certain facts, like causes of death.

This section of the California Code of Civil Procedure provides definitions for terms related to jury selection and service. It defines what a county and a court are, explains the different types of jurors like deferred, excused, prospective, and qualified jurors, and describes lists used in the jury process such as master, source, and summons lists. It also clarifies what a trial jury and a jury of inquest are, among other related concepts.

Each county in California has a jury commissioner who is chosen and can be dismissed by the majority of the superior court judges. If the county has a superior court administrator, that person will also automatically act as the jury commissioner. The current jury commissioners will remain in their roles unless the majority of the court's judges decide otherwise. Jury commissioners can appoint deputies as needed, and these deputies' salaries and benefits will be set like other court employees. The jury commissioner is mainly in charge of running the jury system according to the court's instructions and can create the necessary policies and procedures to manage it effectively.

This law section outlines the process for determining if someone is eligible to serve on a jury. The jury commissioner or court can ask people questions about their qualifications to be a juror, and they must answer under oath. If a person can't respond themselves, someone who knows their situation can respond for them. If a person doesn't respond at all, they might still be thought of as qualified for jury duty. Any information gathered is recorded in court records.

This law explains how people are chosen for jury service in a way that reflects the area's community. They use several lists, like registered voters and drivers licensed by the DMV. Starting in 2022, they also include state tax filers to make sure the list is diverse and representative. The DMV and Franchise Tax Board are responsible for providing these lists, but they must keep the information private and secure, only sharing it with the jury commissioner. This ensures that the jury selection process remains fair and inclusive.

This law explains how jury members are selected for court service in California. It says that the process starts with picking names randomly from a predefined list at least once a year to create a 'master list' of potential jurors. This master list is then used for sending out juror questionnaires and summoning people for jury duty to ensure a fair and unbiased selection of jurors for trials.

This law allows a superior court to select jurors from the area where a court session is held, even if it's not at the usual county seat. The court must follow a local rule that ensures everyone in the county has an equal chance to be picked for jury duty. However, the court can still choose to get jurors from the entire county if it believes it’s necessary for fairness.

This law explains that in a superior court, each judge can have their own separate jury, or one jury can suffice for all judges as needed. Any group of jurors brought in can be used across different judges' trials. Essentially, jurors can be shared among judges for different cases in the court as required.

The jury commissioner is allowed to use mechanical, electric, or electronic equipment to choose and draw jurors, as long as the equipment meets the standards they believe are appropriate.

This law spells out who can and cannot serve as a trial juror in California. You're eligible if you're 18 or older, a U.S. citizen, and a resident of both California and the specific jurisdiction where you’d be serving. You can't serve if you're under adult age, not a U.S. citizen, not a California resident, or if you've been convicted of certain crimes without restored rights. Other disqualifiers include being unable to understand English, currently serving on a jury, under conservatorship, in prison, on parole, or required to register as a sex offender. People are only excluded for these specific reasons. Even if part of this rule is invalidated, the rest remains effective.

This law says that everyone who is eligible cannot avoid being a juror just because of their job, how much money they make, personal characteristics, or almost any other reason. The only way someone can get out of jury duty is if serving would cause serious difficulty, either personally or for the public, and this is determined by specific guidelines.

This section of the law is about the questionnaires that jury commissioners can ask potential jurors to complete. These questionnaires should focus only on identifying, qualifying, and assessing a person's ability to serve as a juror. They are mainly for organizing and managing the jury process, not for selecting jurors for specific trials (voir dire) unless the court orders otherwise.

Courts and trial judges can request additional questionnaires to help select fair jurors or ensure a diverse pool is represented. These rules are set locally. However, this law is temporary and will be repealed on January 1, 2026.

This law outlines how jury commissioners and courts should use questionnaires in the jury selection process. It specifies that these questionnaires can only ask questions related to a juror's identity, qualification, and ability to serve. They are primarily for qualifying jurors and managing the jury system, but not for selecting trial jurors, unless the court orders otherwise. Courts can require additional questionnaires if they're necessary to ensure a fair cross-section of the population is represented. Additionally, the Judicial Council must ensure juror identification includes options for expressing gender identity. This law takes effect on January 1, 2026.

Before they're dismissed, jurors in a criminal case must be told by the judge that they can choose whether or not to discuss the case. Afterward, attorneys, defendants, or prosecutors can talk to jurors about the case if the jurors agree and the meeting is set up reasonably. If the discussion happens more than 24 hours after the verdict, the involved party must inform the juror about the case details, their rights, and what the discussion will cover. Any unwanted attempts to contact jurors must be reported to the judge. Breaking these rules can lead to fines. This law doesn't stop police from looking into criminal activity related to the case. Additionally, after the verdict, defendants can request access to jurors' contact details to explore new trial options, but this must be done through the court.

This law outlines the responsibilities of the jury commissioner regarding record-keeping for jurors. They must keep records on how jurors are selected, qualified, and assigned, as well as track jurors’ attendance, fees, and travel expenses. These records can be stored digitally or on microfilm and must be kept for at least three years after the jury list is made, unless the court decides otherwise.

The jury commissioner is responsible for estimating how many jurors are needed and then summoning them to court. Jurors can be called by mail, in person, or in urgent cases, other methods allowed by law. If summoned by mail, it must be done at least 10 days before jury duty. The jury commissioner can change the jury duty details such as date, time, or place by contacting the juror through different methods like writing, phone calls, or speaking directly.

If you are called for jury duty and don't show up without being excused, the court could make you attend and potentially find you in contempt, leading to a fine or jail time. Instead of harsh penalties, the court might fine you up to $1,500 depending on how many times you've failed to appear. The court will give you a chance to explain before imposing any fines. This money goes to a special court fund, mainly for family and civil courts. You can challenge the fines, and the court might excuse you for a good reason or in the interest of fairness.

This section explains that a summons, which is a notice sent to prospective jurors, must include the date, time, and location where they need to appear. Alternatively, it may provide instructions on how to call the jury commissioner to get these details over the phone. The summons may also include other relevant information for jurors.

The Judicial Council is in charge of creating a uniform jury summons that's easy to understand and attractive to the public. This jury summons needs to include information about special rules for breastfeeding mothers. It's up to each court whether they want to use this summons, unless court rules say otherwise.

This law says that if a court runs out of potential jurors and stopping jury selection would threaten someone's right to a fair trial, the court can order the sheriff or marshal to urgently gather more qualified citizens to form a complete jury panel.

This law states that prospective jurors in California must be available to report for jury duty with just one-hour notice by phone unless it causes them significant difficulty. If they're on call but not needed to actually turn up at court, they'll still get credit for each day of being on call. However, they'll only be paid if they are required to physically appear at the courthouse.

This law requires the jury commissioner to give new jurors an orientation with essential information about serving on a jury. The jurors must also be informed about specific details from another law found in the Government Code.

This law requires that courts provide jurors with private and well-equipped rooms for deliberation, including restroom facilities for both genders. It also states that only jurors and jury staff can use the jury assembly areas, unless given special permission by the jury commissioner.

This law says that in criminal trials, while the jury stays together during the trial or when they are deciding on a verdict, the court can order the sheriff or marshal to supply them with food, lodging, and other essential needs. The cost for these provisions will be taken from the county's Trial Court Operations Fund and paid upon the court's order.

This law lets the jury commissioner decide if a juror has a good reason to be excused from jury duty, following certain guidelines. The commissioner can accept excuses without the juror having to show up in person, as long as the excuse is written down, describes the reason, and is signed by the juror.

The law explains how jurors are chosen for court cases. Normally, a jury commissioner randomly selects people to serve on a jury. However, there are exceptions for certain types of police officers, known as peace officers. Officers in specific positions can't be chosen for jury selection, also known as voir dire, in civil cases or criminal cases, depending on their role described in the Penal Code.

This law mandates that by January 1, 2005, the Judicial Council must create a court rule requiring trial courts to set up processes for accommodating peace officers' schedules when they are serving jury duty.

In most cases, a trial jury is made up of 12 people. However, in civil cases and minor crime cases, the jury can have fewer than 12 members if everyone involved agrees to it.

When a trial is ready to start with a jury, the court's clerk or the jury commissioner will choose potential jurors at random for questioning. This process continues until the jury is chosen or there aren't any more jurors left to consider. If the jury commissioner provides a list of jurors in a random order, the court will follow that list to seat jurors for questioning.

This law describes the process for selecting an impartial jury in civil trials. The judge starts by questioning potential jurors, while lawyers can suggest questions beforehand. After the judge's questioning, lawyers have the right to question jurors to help them decide on their challenges. The judge must allow broad questioning to uncover any biases but cannot set unfair time limits. Improper questions that try to sway jurors before the trial starts are not allowed. Factors like the time needed, complexity, and length of the trial are considered when scheduling the jury selection. Lawyers are allowed brief opening statements before questioning jurors and may sometimes question jurors away from the judge. Written juror questionnaires can be used if reasonable and agreed upon by the court. Finally, the judge should provide the list of potential jurors early to assist both sides in the selection process.

This section outlines the procedure for selecting a fair and impartial jury in a criminal trial. The judge starts by asking potential jurors questions and considers any questions submitted by the parties involved. After the judge’s questioning, the lawyers can also question potential jurors without being too restricted by formal time limits, focusing on preventing bias or prejudice. Judges shouldn't set unreasonable deadlines for these examinations. Improper questions are those that try to sway the jury to a certain decision before the trial. The law allows written questionnaires if requested and provides that questioning should usually happen in front of other jurors. Finally, any decision made by the judge in this process can't be used to reverse a conviction unless it causes a serious injustice.

This law states that if there's a juror who is deaf, hard of hearing, blind, visually impaired, or speech impaired and needs assistance, the parties involved must agree to have a service provider present in the jury room while deliberating. The service provider helps with communication but doesn't participate in the decisions. A service provider could be a sign language interpreter, oral interpreter, or similar professional. The court is responsible for appointing these qualified service providers and ensuring they are paid accordingly.

This section explains that during a trial, any party can object to jurors. There are two main types of challenges: to the entire jury panel and to individual prospective jurors. You can challenge the whole panel if you do it in writing before the jury is sworn in. Those challenges must clearly state their reasons and be shared with all parties and the jury commissioner. The jury commissioner can have legal help with these objections. For individual jurors, there are two challenge types: 'for cause' if a juror can't be impartial or doesn't qualify, and 'peremptory' challenges which don't require a reason.

This section explains the rules for challenging potential jurors during a trial. You can challenge a juror before the jury is sworn in. You don't have to give a reason for a peremptory challenge, which is when you want a juror removed without explanation. Challenges for cause, which require an explanation, must happen before any peremptory challenges. Defendants get to challenge first, followed by the prosecution or plaintiffs.

This section explains how parties in a legal case can challenge jurors during a trial. Parties do not have to make all their challenges at once and can address them one at a time. Challenges can be made against the entire pool of potential jurors, known as the panel, or against individual jurors for different reasons. These reasons include a general inability to serve, an implied bias (like a potential conflict of interest), or an actual bias (detectable prejudice against one party).

This law explains when you can challenge someone from serving as a juror. You can do this for two main reasons: either the person does not meet the necessary qualifications to be a juror, or the person has a condition that makes them unable to do their job as a juror without being unfair to one side in the case.

This section explains when a person can be removed from serving as a juror for having an implied bias. It includes connections to parties involved, like family or business relationships, having served as a juror in related cases, holding an opinion on the case's merits, or having a state of mind showing bias or prejudice. It also mentions that if the juror is involved in another pending case, or if they have strong views against the death penalty that would prevent them from reaching a verdict, they can be challenged.

If someone is challenging a juror for a reason, the court will handle it. The juror who is being challenged and others can be questioned like witnesses, and they have to answer honestly.

This law section outlines the rules for peremptory challenges in California court trials. These challenges allow each side to dismiss a certain number of potential jurors without giving a reason. In serious criminal cases like those punishable by death or life imprisonment, both the defendant and the state can each reject 20 jurors. For other criminal cases, each side gets 10, and in less serious cases punished by up to 90 days in jail, they get 6. In civil cases, each side gets 6 challenges, but if there are multiple parties, they might get 8 or more based on the court's decision. If defendants are tried together, they share challenges but also get extra ones individually. The procedure for using these challenges is that they alternate between the sides until the jury is set. This section became law on January 1, 2021.

This law says that you can't exclude a potential juror just because of their race, ethnicity, or any similar personal characteristic. It aims to prevent unfair removal based on stereotypes or assumptions about bias.

This law prevents the removal of potential jurors based on race, ethnicity, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, national origin, or religious groups through a peremptory challenge, which is a lawyer's right to reject a certain number of jurors without stating a reason. If someone thinks this is happening, they can object, and the court must evaluate whether the challenge is discriminatory without needing evidence of intentional discrimination. Certain reasons for excluding jurors, like their negative view of law enforcement or place of residence, are likely invalid unless clearly shown to be unrelated to bias. If the court finds the challenge improper, they have several options, including restarting jury selection. This rule does not apply to civil cases and is effective until January 1, 2026.

Under this law, you can't dismiss a potential juror just because of their race, ethnicity, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, national origin, or religion. If someone thinks a juror was dismissed for these reasons, they can object, and the court must discuss it outside the jury's earshot. The person who wants the juror dismissed must share their reasons, and the court will decide if those reasons are valid without assuming bias. A challenge might fail if it's based on stereotypes or assumptions seen as biased. If the court finds a wrongful challenge, different remedies are available, such as seating the challenged juror or starting jury selection over. This rule is in place to prevent discrimination and will officially apply to jury selections starting from January 1, 2022.

Before choosing jurors for a trial, each prospective juror must agree to truthfully and accurately answer questions about their ability to serve. This agreement is given under penalty of perjury, meaning false answers could lead to a criminal charge. After the jury is selected, jurors must also agree to honestly evaluate the case and deliver a verdict based only on the evidence and the judge's instructions.

If a juror falls ill or is unable to perform their duties before the verdict is returned, the court can discharge them. An alternate juror will be appointed if available. If no alternates are left and a juror is unable to continue, the jury will be discharged, and a new jury might be selected, or with everyone's agreement, the trial could proceed with the remaining jurors or restart with a new juror.

This law allows a judge in a long or complicated trial to add "alternate jurors" who can step in if one of the main jurors cannot continue. Alternate jurors are selected just like regular jurors and have to follow the same rules, but they only participate in decision-making if needed. They must stay involved throughout the trial and can be brought in if a regular juror can't fulfill their duties due to reasons like illness. Before the trial ends, alternate jurors are released only when the main jurors are let go.

If the sheriff, coroner, or similar official asks, the jury commissioner must supply potential jurors for an inquest jury. These jurors are chosen, required to serve, and paid just like regular jurors.

This law section describes a process for a coroner's inquest, where six or more prospective jurors are sworn in to investigate a person's death. Their job is to determine the identity of the deceased and how, when, and where the death happened. They must also consider the circumstances surrounding the death and give an accurate verdict based on the evidence provided to them or through examining the body.

This law deals with the confidentiality of personal information of jurors in criminal cases. After a jury gives a verdict, their personal details like names and addresses need to be sealed and kept private. If someone wants access to this information, they must file a petition showing a good reason. The court then decides if there's a strong reason to keep this information hidden, such as protecting jurors from harm. If the court agrees that the information can be shared, former jurors must be notified, and they can protest if they disagree. Unauthorized disclosure of this confidential information by court staff is a misdemeanor.

This law requires that after a jury gives a verdict or finishes a trial in a violent crime case, they should receive information about mental health, stress relief, and trauma symptoms. This applies both to jurors and alternate jurors. If the jury doesn't reach a verdict, the information is given as they are discharged. The court may also choose to provide this to jurors in non-violent cases. The Judicial Council is responsible for creating these educational materials, which will cover signs of distress and how to cope or get help. A violent felony is defined as per the Penal Code.