From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Jayasundera

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Dec 15, 2011
CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-20078 (E.D. Mich. Dec. 15, 2011)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-20078

12-15-2011

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. VICTOR JAYASUNDERA, ET AL., Defendants.


DISTRICT JUDGE AVERN COHN


MAGISTRATE JUDGE MARK A. RANDON


ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT JAYASUNDERA'S MOTION

FOR ATTORNEY CONDUCTED VOIR DIRE (DKT. NO. 75) AND DENYING

HIS MOTION FOR SUPPLEMENTAL JURY QUESTIONNAIRE (DKT. NO. 80)

Before the Court are Defendant Victor Jayasundera's motion for attorney conducted voir dire (Dkt. No. 75) and his motion for a supplemental jury questionnaire (Dkt. No. 80) The Government has not filed a response to either motion. On November 30, 2011, Judge Avern Cohn referred both motions to the undersigned for hearing and determination pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A).

The decision to allow attorney-conducted voir dire or a supplemental jury questionnaire falls within the discretion of the trial court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(a)(1) and (2); Rosales-Lopez v. United States, 451 U. S. 182, 189 (1981) ("Because the obligation to impanel an impartial jury lies in the first instance with the trial judge, and because he must rely largely on his immediate perceptions, federal judges have been accorded ample discretion in determining how best to conduct the voir dire.").

Having reviewed both motions and the proposed/sample supplemental jury questionnaire, the undersigned finds that the proposed jury questionnaire will not assist the Court or counsel in selecting a fair and impartial jury. However, the Court will permit the attorneys to conduct the voir dire, subject to reasonable time limits, to be placed on the record before jury selection. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that Defendant's motion for attorney conducted voir dire IS GRANTED and his motion for a supplemental jury questionnaire IS DENIED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall exchange a list of proposed voir dire questions at least two business days prior to jury selection so that any objections can be ruled upon before jury selection begins.

So Ordered.

__________

Mark A. Randon

United States Magistrate Judge

Certificate of Service

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served on the parties of record on this date, December 15, 2011, electronically.

Melody R. Miles

Case Manager to Magistrate Judge Mark A. Randon

(313) 234-5542


Summaries of

United States v. Jayasundera

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Dec 15, 2011
CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-20078 (E.D. Mich. Dec. 15, 2011)
Case details for

United States v. Jayasundera

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. VICTOR JAYASUNDERA, ET AL.…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Date published: Dec 15, 2011

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-20078 (E.D. Mich. Dec. 15, 2011)