Arizona

Criminal Procedure

Criminal Procedure

Rule 18.4 – Challenges

(a)Challenge to the Panel. Any party may challenge the panel on the ground that its selection involved a material departure from the requirements of law. Challenges to the panel on this ground must be in writing, specify the factual basis for the challenge, and make a showing of prejudice to the party. A party must make, and the court must decide, a challenge to a panel before the examination of any individual prospective juror.
(b)Challenge for Cause. On motion or on its own, the court must excuse a prospective juror or jurors from service in the case if there is a reasonable ground to believe that the juror or jurors cannot render a fair and impartial verdict. A challenge for cause may be made at any time, but the court may deny a challenge if the party was not diligent in making it.
(c)Peremptory Challenges.

(1)Generally. The court must allow both parties the following number of peremptory challenges:

(A) 10, if the offense charged is punishable by death;
(B) 6, in all other cases tried in superior court; and
(C) two, in all cases tried in limited jurisdiction courts.
(2)If Several Defendants Are Tried Jointly. If there is more than one defendant, each defendant is allowed one-half the number of peremptory challenges allowed to one defendant. The State is not entitled to any additional peremptory challenges.
(3)Agreement Between the Parties. The parties may agree to exercise fewer than the allowable number of peremptory challenges.

Ariz. R. Crim. P. 18.4

Added August 31, 2017, effective January 1, 2018.

COMMENT

Rule 18.4(b). When the predecessor to this section was adopted in 1973, it replaced the catalog of 15 grounds set forth in the 1956 Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 219. The omission of the list is carried over to this amended rule and is intended to direct the attention of attorneys and judges to the essential question–whether a juror can try a case fairly. A challenge for cause can be based on a showing of facts from which an ordinary person would imply a likelihood of predisposition in favor of one of the parties.

In addition, a juror may be challenged who:

(1) has been convicted of a felony;

(2) lacks any of the qualifications prescribed by law to render a person a competent juror;

(3) is of such unsound mind or body as to render him incapable of performing the duties of a juror;

(4) is related by consanguinity or affinity within the fourth degree to the person alleged to be injured by the offense charged, or on whose complaint the prosecution was instituted, or to the defendant;

(5) stands in the relationship of guardian and ward, attorney and client, master and servant, or landlord and tenant, or is an employee of or member of the family of the defendant, or of the person alleged to be injured by the offense charged or on whose complaint the prosecution was instituted;

(6) has been a party adverse to the defendant in a civil action, or has complained against or been accused by him in a criminal prosecution;

(7) has served on the grand jury which found the indictment, or on a coroner’s jury which inquired into the death of a person whose death is the subject of the indictment or information;

(8) has served on the trial jury which has tried another person for the offense charged in the indictment or information;

(9) has been a member of the jury formerly sworn to try the same charge and whose verdict was set aside, or which was discharged without a verdict after the case was submitted to it;

(10) has served as a juror in a civil action brought against the defendant for the act charged as an offense;

(11) is on the bond of the defendant or engaged in business with the defendant or with the person alleged to be injured by the offense charged or on whose complaint the prosecution was instituted;

(12) is a witness on the part of the prosecution or defendant or has been served with a subpoena or bound by an undertaking as such;

(13) has a state of mind in reference to the action or to the defendant or to the person alleged to have been injured by the offense charged or on whose complaint the prosecution was instituted, which will prevent him from acting with entire impartiality and without prejudice to the substantial rights of either party;

(14) if the offense charged is punishable by death, entertains conscientious opinions which would preclude his finding the defendant guilty, in which case he must neither be permitted nor compelled to serve as a juror; or

(15) does not understand the English language sufficiently well to comprehend the testimony offered at the trial.

This section also permits a challenge for cause to be made whenever the cause appears. Under Rule 18.4(b), the trial court may deny the challenge if not seasonably made, but there is no absolute time limitation imposed by rule. Once the trial has begun, the prosecutor may be unable, because of double jeopardy, to invoke the right to challenge, unless there are sufficient alternate jurors to enable the trial to continue with one less juror.

HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES

Former Rule 18.3, relating to challenges, was abrogated effective January 1, 2018.