Rule 22 - Selection of Jury (a)Juror Orientation. When a new panel of prospective jurors is first summoned for service the panel shall be given preliminary instructions regarding the terms and conditions of jury service, the role of the jury in the justice system, and the legal principles applicable to the cases the jurors may hear. Such instructions may be given by a justice of the superior court, by utilization of a prerecorded audio or video presentation created for this purpose, or by a combination of use of a recording and instruction by a justice. Juror orientation sessions shall be open to the public. Except during periods when an audio or video recording is being played, all proceedings involving the judge giving preliminary instructions and taking and responding to juror questions shall be conducted on the record. The record of juror orientation sessions shall be preserved for a period of ten years. (b)Juror Questionnaires. (1) The clerk of the superior court for each county shall maintain a list of jurors presently serving, together with electronic copies of their completed questionnaires. The clerk's office may maintain a paper copy which may be available upon request for inspection by attorneys, non-attorney representatives and parties representing themselves. (2) The clerk's office shall permit attorneys, non-attorney representatives and parties representing themselves who have jury cases scheduled for trial during the term to have an electronic copy of the questionnaires which have been completed by the jurors presently serving. None of these persons shall reveal any information contained in the questionnaires to any person except as may be necessary in connection with the prosecution or defense of the case or cases for which access was granted. (3) Violation of this rule may be treated as contempt of court. (c)Examination. (1) The court shall instruct the panel of prospective jurors prior to jury selection as to: (A) The nature and purpose of the selection process. (B) The nature of the case to be presented. (C) The specific issues for resolution. (D) A summary of the law to be used in their consideration of the evidence. (E) Any controversial aspects of the trial likely to invoke bias. (2) In all cases, the court shall have the responsibility to ensure that each empanelled juror is qualified, fair, and impartial. All proceedings relating to the examination of prospective jurors shall be recorded and should be conducted in the presence of counsel, or the defendant, if self-represented. (3) In capital cases or first degree murder cases, the court shall allow counsel to conduct individual voir dire. In all other cases, voir dire shall be conducted as set forth in RSA 500-A:12-a. (d)Peremptory Challenges. For offenses punishable by death, the defendant shall be accorded, in addition to challenges for cause, no fewer than twenty peremptory challenges; the State shall be afforded, in addition to challenges for cause, no fewer than ten peremptory challenges. In first degree murder cases, both the State and the defendant shall be afforded, in addition to challenges for cause, no fewer than fifteen peremptory challenges. In all other criminal cases the defendant and the State shall, in addition to challenges for cause, be entitled to no fewer than three peremptory challenges. In trials involving multiple charges, the number of peremptory challenges shall be the number of challenges allowed for the most serious offense charged. (e)Alternate Jurors. Upon request by either the State or the defendant, or sua sponte, the court may direct that alternate jurors be chosen. The number of peremptory challenges allotted to both the State and the defendant for selection of alternate jurors shall be in accordance with the following schedule: | 1-3 alternates -- 1 peremptory challenge |
| 4-6 alternates -- 2 peremptory challenges |
Adopted effective 1/1/2016 in Strafford and Cheshire counties and 7/1/2016 in Belknap County.Comment
The rule requires that all communication with the panelists be recorded, and further provides that all communications should be conducted in the presence of counsel. State v. Bailey, 127 N.H. 416 (1985); State v. Brodowski, 135 N.H. 197, 201 (1991). The rule does not absolutely foreclose the possibility that the court could communicate with potential jurors outside the presence of counsel, in recognition of the fact that, in relatively rare instances, the interest in full disclosure by jurors of sensitive, but relevant, matters may be advanced by allowing the court to inquire into those matters in private with the juror. Those communications, though, like all other communications with jurors, must be recorded.
Paragraph (d) provides that in trials adjudicating multiple charges, the number of peremptory challenges available to the parties depends on the most serious charge. Paragraph (d) does not provide for cases of multiple defendants, thus leaving intact the traditional practice in New Hampshire of allowing each defendant the full number of challenges provided by the law. State v. Doolittle, 58 N.H. 92 (1877). Paragraph (d) allows the trial court discretion with regard to control of the manner, order and timing of the parties' peremptory challenges. State v. Farrow, 118 N. H. 296, 307 (1978); State v. Prevost, 105 N.H. 90 (1963).