Section 21.6 In General

• Library: Criminal Practice 2012 Supp

A. (§21.6) In General

Motions to quash the jury panel are made to attack the selection of the petit jury panel. Any number of grounds can be urged, including but not limited to the following:

The jury was not selected in accordance with applicable statutes. Compare State ex rel. Woods v. Connett, 525 S.W.2d 326 (Mo. banc 1975) (successful grand jury challenge), with State v. Gresham, 637 S.W.2d 20 (Mo. banc 1982) (“key man” selection process).

The methods of selecting the jury do not ensure that the jury is drawn from a fair cross-section of the community. See, e.g., Duren v. Mo., 439 U.S. 357 (1979); Gresham, 637 S.W.2d 20.

The statutes and constitutional provisions governing the selection of the jury are unconstitutional on their face or as applied. See, e.g., Duren, 439 U.S. 357.

Prejudicial pretrial publicity is such that the jurors are biased against the defendant. See, e.g., Irvin v. Dowd, 366 U.S. 717 (1961).

Prejudicial remarks of the...