EAGAN, Minn., May 27, 2015 /PRNewswire/ -- Attorneys
seeking a change of venue over concerns of biased jurors may figure
it doesn't hurt to ask. But it rarely helps. In fact, according to
data of federal criminal district courts from Thomson Reuters
Westlaw, the leading legal research service, change of venue is
seldom granted.
Recently, attorneys for convicted Boston Marathon bomber
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev sought to have his trial moved, citing the
tremendous amount of pre-trial publicity surrounding his case.
However, that motion was denied by the judge. Other high-profile
defendants in federal criminal court, such as former Enron CEO
Jeffrey Skilling, also were unable
to obtain change of venue.
A motion for change of venue can be filed, by either side, for a
number of reasons. Judges often move trials, but Westlaw data shows
that prejudice, or pretrial publicity, is seldom one of the reasons
why.
Judges may grant a motion, for example, if one of the parties
has a medical condition that makes traveling to a distant court
difficult. Sometimes cases are transferred from juvenile to adult
court. Other cases are relocated simply because they were
inadvertently filed in the wrong jurisdiction.
But motions based on claims of pretrial publicity face an uphill
battle.
Opposing counsel may argue that moving a trial would mean travel
hardships for witnesses, victims and attorneys. Judges often assert
that voir dire, the jury screening process, is more
effective than changing venue for ensuring an unbiased jury.
"Attorneys who bring this type of motion may wish to review the
judges' past orders granting or denying change of venue," explains
Westlaw Reference Attorney Angela
Haukebo. "These orders can help an attorney determine which
arguments were best received or, at the least, considered by the
judge that is about to hear the motion."
According to Westlaw data, about 200 change of venue motions
have been filed in federal district criminal court cases since
2012. Of these, approximately 60 motions were granted. But only one
may have been due to potential jury prejudice.
Even in that case, it can only be presumed that it was
granted for reasons of pre-trial publicity, because
discussions concerning it were sealed by the court.
Meanwhile, a motion is pending in the trial of former Massey
Energy CEO Don Blankenship,
scheduled to begin July 13 in
southern West Virginia. He was
indicted on federal criminal charges related to the 2010 Upper Big
Branch Mine explosion that killed 29 people. A motion has been
filed to move the trial because of pre-trial publicity, but the
federal judge won't decide whether to grant the motion until
potential jurors are questioned, a process expected to be completed
just before the trial begins.
One of the most notable change of venue requests previously
granted in a federal criminal court involved Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh in 1997. After winning a venue
change from Oklahoma, he was
convicted in Denver and executed
in 2001.
CONTACT
Scott Augustin
Thomson Reuters
651-848-5793
scott.augustin@thomsonreuters.com
To view the original version on PR Newswire,
visit:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/biased-jury-claims-rarely-convince-judges-to-change-venue-300088615.html
SOURCE Thomson Reuters Westlaw