In a California criminal trial, the judge and lawyers ask prospective jurors questions to learn whether they can evaluate the case fairly under the court’s instructions. They may explore a person’s knowledge of the case, relationships, experiences, or views that could affect impartiality. A particular answer does not automatically mean someone will be excused; the court applies the rules to the answers and circumstances in the record.
What the judge and lawyers ask
The judge conducts the initial examination in a criminal jury trial. The parties may submit questions, and counsel may ask supplemental questions within the judge’s reasonable limits. The purpose is to explore possible case-specific bias and grounds for challenges for cause—not to persuade jurors to favor one side. (California Code of Civil Procedure § 223)
The questions depend on the case. Under the California rules and judicial guidance, topics can include whether a prospective juror has heard about the case; knows a party, witness, or lawyer; has relevant experiences with crime or law enforcement; or can apply the presumption of innocence, burden of proof, and the judge’s instructions. Some questions may be asked in a questionnaire, and sensitive matters may be handled outside the full panel’s presence. These are examples, not a required checklist for every trial. (California Rules of Court, rules 4.200 and 4.201; California Standards of Judicial Administration, standard 4.30.)
The point is to understand the person’s actual answers and circumstances, not to guess what someone will do based on appearance or background. A prior experience, opinion, or connection may call for follow-up, but it does not automatically establish bias or require removal.
Hardship, a challenge for cause, and a peremptory challenge
These are different parts of jury selection:
| Issue | What it addresses |
|---|---|
| Hardship | Whether serving would create a qualifying burden. Hardship is considered through the court’s jury-selection process; it is not itself proof that a person cannot be impartial. |
| Challenge for cause | Whether a legal ground makes a prospective juror unable or unqualified to serve impartially. California law addresses general disqualification, specified forms of implied bias, and actual bias. The judge decides a cause challenge based on the record. A troubling answer or personal experience is not automatically enough. (Code Civ. Proc. §§225, 228, 229, 230.) |
| Peremptory challenge | A limited challenge that ordinarily does not require a stated reason, but it cannot be used on a prohibited discriminatory basis. Section 231.7 provides a procedure for raising and deciding an objection. The available number of challenges depends on the case and circumstances, so there is no single number that applies to every criminal trial. (Code Civ. Proc. §§226, 231, 231.7.) |
The cause/peremptory distinction matters: a cause challenge asks the judge to find a legal reason that a juror cannot serve impartially; a peremptory challenge is subject to numerical limits and California’s nondiscrimination rules. A detailed objection to a potentially discriminatory strike is a separate procedure, and the available steps depend on the trial record.
What a defendant can raise with counsel
If you are the defendant, tell your lawyer privately about a concrete concern that may not have come up in questioning—for example, a prospective juror’s known connection to a party or witness, case publicity you recognize, or an answer that you believe was misunderstood. Counsel can compare that information with the questions, answers, and court record and decide whether follow-up or a legal challenge is appropriate. Do not contact prospective jurors or try to influence their answers.
Jury selection is specific to the charge, the evidence, the people involved, and the court’s rulings. No question or answer guarantees who will serve or predicts the verdict. For help discussing a California criminal case and its trial record, contact the Law Offices of David S. Chesley at (800) 755-5174.