Jenkins v. United States

Background

A man was tried on two criminal counts: an alleged robbery of a High’s Dairy Products store in December 1962 and an assault with intent to rob a grocery store proprietress in January 1963. After a jury trial he was convicted of the robbery count, acquitted on the assault count, and sentenced to three to ten years in prison. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction, and the jury had, shortly after beginning deliberations, sent a note saying it could not agree because of insufficient evidence.

Reasoning

When the judge brought the jury back to the courtroom, he told them, “You have got to reach a decision.” The Supreme Court examined that statement in its full context and under all the circumstances and concluded that the remark had a coercive effect on the jury. Because jurors must be free to hold conscientious views without being forced to agree, the Court found the judge’s comment impermissibly pressured the jury and required reversal of the conviction and a new trial.

Real world impact

The decision protects jury independence by making clear that trial judges may not improperly pressure juries to reach verdicts. The case is procedural: it does not decide guilt or innocence on the facts but requires that this defendant be retried without coercive judicial comments. Lower courts and trial judges will need to avoid similar remarks to prevent reversal.

Dissents or concurrances

Two Justices, Clark and Harlan, dissented from the reversal, indicating disagreement with the majority’s view that the judge’s remark was coercive.