Divided on unanimity

Convictions by a 10-2 majority get a new challenge.

, The National Law Journal

Nearly 40 years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court found no constitutional problem with nonunanimous jury verdicts in serious state criminal trials. Have modern jury research and the justices' own recent rulings turned that 1972 precedent into an unconstitutional anachronism? Lawyers for a Louisiana inmate say the answer is yes, and they make the argument in a petition asking the justices to overturn Apodaca v. Oregon.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com