RULE 24. TRIAL JURORS(a) Examination. The court shall cause the prospective jurors to be sworn or affirmed to answer truthfully the questions they will be asked during the selection process, identify the parties and their counsel, and briefly outline the nature of the case. The court may put to the respective jurors appropriate questions regarding their qualifications to serve as jurors in the case and shall permit questioning by the parties for the purpose of discovering bases for challenge for cause and enabling an intelligent exercise of peremptory challenges. The court, upon motion of a party or on its own motion, may direct that any portion of the questioning of a prospective juror be conducted out of the presence of the tentatively selected jurors and other prospective jurors.
(b) Challenges for Cause. If the trial judge, after examination of any juror, is of the opinion that grounds for challenge for cause are present, the judge shall excuse that juror from the trial of the case. After the trial judge has tentatively determined that the jury meets the prescribed qualifications, adversary counsel may conduct further examination and challenges for cause may be exercised alternately by counsel for the respective parties. Any party may challenge a prospective juror for cause if:
(1) there exists any ground for challenge for cause provided by law;
(2) the prospective juror's exposure to potentially prejudicial information makes the person unacceptable as a juror. Both the degree of exposure and the prospective juror's testimony as to his or her state of mind shall be considered in determining acceptability. A prospective juror who states that he or she will be unable to overcome preconceptions shall be subject to challenge for cause no matter how slight the exposure. If the prospective juror has seen or heard and remembers information that will be developed in the course of trial, or that may be inadmissible but is not so prejudicial as to create a substantial risk that his or her judgment will be affected, the prospective juror's acceptability shall depend on whether the testimony as to impartiality is believed. If the prospective juror admits to having formed an opinion, he or she shall be subject to challenge for cause unless the examination shows unequivocally that the prospective juror can be impartial.
(c) Peremptory Challenge and Procedure for Exercising, - After prospective jurors have been passed for cause, counsel will submit simultaneously and in writing, to the trial judge, the name of any juror in the group of the first twelve who have been seated that either counsel elects to challenge peremptorily. Upon each submission, each counsel shall submit either a challenge or a blank sheet of paper. Neither party shall make known the fact that the party has not challenged. Replacement jurors will be seated in the panel of twelve in the order of their selection. If necessary, additional replacement jurors will then be examined for cause and, after passed, counsel will again submit simultaneously, and in writing, to the trial judge the name of any juror in the group of twelve that counsel elects to challenge peremptorily. This procedure will be followed until a full jury has been selected and accepted by counsel. Peremptory challenges may be directed to any member of the jury, and counsel shall not be limited to replacement jurors. Alternate jurors will be selected in the same manner. The trial judge will keep a list of those challenged and, if the same juror is challenged by both parties, each will be charged with the challenge. The trial judge shall not disclose to any juror the identity of the party challenging the juror.
(d) Number of Peremptory Challenges. - If the offense charged is punishable by death, each defendant is entitled to fifteen peremptory challenges, and the state is entitled to fifteen peremptory challenges for each defendant. If the offense charged is punishable by imprisonment for more than one year, each defendant is entitled to eight peremptory challenges, and the state is entitled to eight peremptory challenges for each defendant. If the offense charged is punishable by imprisonment for less than one year or by fine or both, each side is entitled to three peremptory challenges for each defendant.
(e) Alternate Jurors. - The trial court in its discretion may use either of the following methods to select alternate jurors:
(1) The court may direct that jurors in addition to the regular jury be called and impanelled to sit as alternate jurors. Alternate jurors, in the order in which they are selected, shall replace jurors who, prior to the time the jury retires to consider its verdict, become or are found to be unable or disqualified to perform their duties. Alternate jurors shall be drawn in the same manner, shall have the same qualifications, shall be subject to the same examination and challenges, shall take the same oath, and shall have the same functions, powers, facilities, and privileges as the regular jurors. An alternate who does not replace a regular juror shall be discharged when the jury retires to consider its verdict. For each alternate juror to be selected, each side is entitled to one peremptory challenge for each defendant. The additional peremptory challenges may be used only as each alternate juror is selected; and the other peremptory challenges allowed by this rule may not be used against an alternate juror.
(2) The court may direct prior to the start of jury selection that jurors in addition to the regular jury be called and impanelled as alternate jurors. For each alternate juror to be selected, each side is entitled to one peremptory challenge for each defendant. There shall be no distinction made by the court as to which jurors shall ultimately be designated alternate jurors at any time during the jury selection or the trial of the case. Before the jury retires to consider its verdict, the court shall select at random or by lot the names of the requisite number of jurors to reduce the jury to a body of twelve.
(f) Admonitions. The court shall give the prospective jurors appropriate admonitions regarding their conduct during the selection process. The Court shall also give the jurors, once they are sworn, appropriate admonitions regarding their conduct during the case. In each case these shall include admonitions:
(1) not to communicate with other jurors or anyone else regarding any subject connected with the trial, nor to form or express any opinion thereon until the case is finally submitted to the jury;
(2) to report promptly to the court any incident involving an attempt by any person improperly to influence any member of the jury or a violation by any juror of any of the court's admonitions; and
(3) not to read, listen to, or view any news reports concerning the case. The court shall explain that the case must be decided solely and alone upon the evidence introduced upon the trial.
(g) List of Prospective Jurors. Upon request the parties shall be furnished with a list of members of the jury panel, containing the following information with respect to each: name, address, occupation, name of spouse, occupation of spouse. The list shall also state whether each prospective juror has previously served on a criminal court jury; however, that information need not be provided prior to the day of trial.
[Amended effective July 10, 1988.]
This rule assures counsel the right to conduct at least part of the voir dire examination of prospective jurors. It also expressly reflects the trial court's authority to sequester prospective and tentatively selected jurors from a prospective juror being individually questioned.
A prospective juror who has formed or expressed an opinion as to the merits of the case may still be qualified to serve, but only upon an unequivocal showing of impartiality. The Commission disapproves of questions tending to lead the prospective juror or suggest partiality in the first instance, and also disapproves of that procedure in "rehabilitating" the prospective juror into vocalizing impartiality. Such a prospective juror should be held to be qualified only upon a truly unequivocal showing of impartiality.
The procedure for exercising peremptory challenges in writing is new and is designed to insulate parties and counsel from the public exercise of a peremptory challenge. Counsel will be expected to honor the spirit of the rule and to maintain the privacy of their respective peremptory challenges.
The number of peremptory challenges is the same as that provided under present law, except that the State is allowed two additional challenges in capital cases.
The number of possible alternate jurors has been increased to four under this rule. The identity of and minimal information about each member of the jury panel available upon request should save time by shortening the voir dire.
Comment to 1988 Amendment
The amendment to this rule adds an optional procedure for selecting and impanelling alternate jurors. The purpose of subsection (e)(2) is to reduce the possibility that a juror will be inattentive in that the alternate(s) will not be designated until the close of the case. See State v. Blunt, 708 S.W.2d 415 (Tenn.Cr.App.1985).