Jury Instructions for the Modern Age:
A 50-State Survey of Jury Instructions on Internet and Social Media Eric P. Robinson1 Juror use of the Internet and social media during trial has been a growing concern of the bench and bar for the past several years. A recent study by Reuters of reported cases on Westlaw found 90 verdicts called into question since 1999 because of jurors’ online activities. More than half the cases are from the last two years. In 28 of the cases, 21 of them since January 2009, new trials were granted or verdicts were overturned.2 Juror use of this media may take several forms: jurors conducting independent research on the case on the Internet; sending e-mails, text messages, Tweets or other communication conveying developments in a trial or deliberations; or using the camera feature of mobile technology to record courtroom proceedings. In response to this growing concern — and a growing number of mistrials in some cases due to improper juror use of technology — several states have adopted or proposed rules or statutes that would explicitly limit such activity by jurors. Courts have also responded to this trend with including partial or complete bans of cellphones and similar electronic devices from courtrooms and even entire courthouses. Many jurisdictions have also altered their jury instructions to tell jurors about the limitations on use of these devices during voir dire, trial and deliberations. And while many of these efforts have been comprehensive within their respective jurisdictions, the overall American landscape is speckled with inconsistency and outright silence on the vexing question of how best to handle the growing problems of smart devices and social media as they 1. Special thanks to Journal Board of Editors member Nancy Rapoport, a professor at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas William S. Boyd School of Law; Jeanne F. Price (Director), Jennifer Gross, and Chad Schatzle of the Wiener-Rogers Law Library at the Boyd School of Law; Blake F. Quackenbush, a student at the Boyd law school; Adeen Postar, Deputy Director of the Pence Law Library at the American University Washington College of Law; Karen Salaz, District Administrator of Colorado’s 19th Judicial District; Leigh Anne Hiatt, Public Information Officer with the Office of Public Information of Administrative Office of the Courts in Kentucky; and Dean P. Land, Legal Publications Attorney, Oregon State Bar, for their assistance with the research for this article. Thanks also to University of Neavada Associate Professor Swart Cheifet for his comments. 2. Brian Grow, As jurors go online, U.S. trials go off track, Reuters Legal, Dec. 8, 2010, http://www. reuters.com/article/2010/12/08/internet-jurors-idUSN0816547120101208. Reynolds Courts & Media Law Journal
307