Smith v. DeRobertis
| Decision Date | 27 March 1985 |
| Docket Number | No. 84-1716,84-1716 |
| Citation | 758 F.2d 1151 |
| Parties | Terrance SMITH, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Richard DeROBERTIS, Warden, and Neil F. Hartigan, Attorney General of Illinois, Respondents-Appellees. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit |
Terrance Smith, pro se.
Sally L. Dilgart, Asst. Atty. Gen., Chicago, Ill., for respondents-appellees.
Before BAUER, WOOD and POSNER, Circuit Judges.
The question for decision is whether the simultaneous trial of two criminal defendants in the same state courtroom before two juries (one determining the guilt of each defendant) violates the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The district court in this habeas corpus proceeding held that it did not, and the petitioner, Smith, appeals.
Smith and Bell were charged with murder and other crimes arising from a home invasion, and were tried together before separate juries. Both juries were present for the opening statements and for the state's direct examination of the prosecution witnesses, but Smith's jury was excused for Bell's cross-examination of those witnesses and for Bell's defense case (Bell testified), while Bell's jury was excused for the corresponding portion of Smith's trial. Bell was convicted on all counts. Smith was found guilty of murder and two counts of attempted murder but acquitted of aggravated battery, and sentenced to 200-300 years in prison on each count, the sentences to be served concurrently. The state appellate court reversed Smith's murder conviction but upheld his other convictions, so that his sentence was unaffected. See People v. Smith, 94 Ill.App.3d 969, 50 Ill.Dec. 296, 419 N.E.2d 404 (1981).
The trial judge adopted the double-jury procedure as an economy measure; and although the Illinois code of procedure does not provide for the use of double juries, the lack of a statutory basis does not demonstrate a lack of due process; a state is authorized to act through common law as well as statute. Although the double-jury procedure is an innovation with nothing more to recommend it than a saving in trial time, judicial economy is not a trivial goal in this era of massive caseloads; and the Supreme Court, in upholding the constitutionality of the six-person jury in criminal cases, has shown that it is receptive to innovations designed to reduce the high cost of jury trials. See Williams v. Florida, 399 U.S. 78, 102-03, 90 S.Ct. 1893, 1907, 26 L.Ed.2d 446 (1970).
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brown v. Sirmons
...at 1186 (finding no violation of due process or any other trial right in the use of dual juries in a capital case); Smith v. DeRobertis, 758 F.2d 1151, 1152 (7th Cir.1985) ("A defendant is more likely to be prejudiced in the eyes of the jury by being tried with another defendant than by bei......
-
Beam v. Paskett, No. 90-35616
...470 F.2d 1158, 1169-70 (9th Cir.1972), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1127, 93 S.Ct. 948, 35 L.Ed.2d 260 (1973); see also Smith v. DeRobertis, 758 F.2d 1151, 1152 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 838, 106 S.Ct. 118, 88 L.Ed.2d 96 (1985); United States v. Lewis, 716 F.2d 16, 19 (D.C.Cir.), cert. d......
-
People v. Harris
...v. Hayes (11th Cir.1982) 676 F.2d 1359, 1366 ["neither has alleged any more than a generalized possibility of harm"]; Smith v. DeRobertis (7th Cir.1985) 758 F.2d 1151; United States v. Rimar (6th Cir.1977) 558 F.2d 1271, 1273 ["nowhere in the record do we find any continuing confusion, so p......
-
Uniroyal Goodrich Tire Co. v. Ford
...596 So.2d 1197, 1199-1200 (Fla.App. 3 Dist.1992); United States v. Hayes, 676 F.2d 1359, 1366-1367 (11th Cir.1982); Smith v. DeRobertis, 758 F.2d 1151 (7th Cir.1985). In one civil case, the trial court ordered the simultaneous use of two juries in a complex air crash case as an economical m......
-
Joint criminal trials with multiple juries: why they are used and suggested ways to implement them.
...violate the petitioner's rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and 14th amendments), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1060 (1994); Smith v. DeRobertis, 758 F. 2d 1151 (7th Cir.) (simultaneous trial of two defendants in same courtroom before two juries, one determining guilt of each defendant, did not violat......