Social Media, the Internet, and Trial by Jury

Literature Cited

1. Am. Bar Assoc. 2011. Tech in the courts. Am. Bar Assoc. J. 97:30
   [Google Scholar]
2. Brayer P 2016. The disconnected juror: smart devices and juries in the Digital Age. Notre Dame J. Law Ethics Public Policy 30:25–48
   [Google Scholar]
3. Bricker J 2017. Open minds? The challenge of finding impartial juries in a nation divided. Or. State Bar Bull. 77:19–23
   [Google Scholar]
4. Brown K 2013. Somebody poisoned the jury pool: social media's effect on jury impartiality. Tex. Wesleyan Law Rev. 19:809–35
   [Google Scholar]
5. Browning J 2010. When all that Twitters is not told: dangers of the online juror. Tex. Bar J. 73:216–20
   [Google Scholar]
6. Browning J 2017. Technology and the law: behaving badly: When is online jury misconduct severe enough for a mistrial. Tex. Bar J. 80:226 https://www.texasbar.com/AM/Template.cfm?Section=articles&Template=/CM/HTMLDisplay.cfm&ContentID=36363
   [Google Scholar]
7. Burnett A 2005. Jury reform for the 21st century: a judge's perspective. Crim. Justice Mag. 20:32–39
   [Google Scholar]
8. Cato J 2010. Burgeoning social networking system has legal community in a Twitter. Pittsburgh Tribune-Review Feb. 8. http://triblive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/tribpm/s_666211.html
9. Conf. Court Public Inf. Off. (CCPIO). 2011. 2011 CCPIO New Media Survey Rep 5–715–18 New Media Comm. Conf. Court Public Inf. Off http://ccpio.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2011-ccpio-report.pdf
10. Dietz v. Bouldin 136 S. Ct. 1885, 1895 (2016)
11. Dubin J 2017. Juror misconduct in the Age of Social Technology. The Champion March 20
12. Dunn M 2011. Jurors’ use of social media during trials and deliberations: a report to the Judicial Conference Committee on Court Administration and Case Management Rep Fed. Judic. Cent. Washington, DC:
13. Dunn M 2014. Jurors’ and attorneys’ use of social media during voir dire, trials, and deliberations: a report to the Judicial Conference Committee on Court Administration and Case Management Rep. Fed. Judic. Cent. Washington, DC:
14. Grow B 2010. As jurors go online, U.S. trials go off track. Reuters Dec. 8. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-internet-jurors/as-jurors-go-online-u-s-trials-go-off-track-idUSTRE6B74Z820101208
15. Hannaford-Agor P, Rottman D, Waters N 2011. Juror and jury use of new media: a baseline exploration Perspect. State Court Leadersh., Exec. Sess. State Court Lead. 21st Cent., Natl. Cent. State Courts Williamsburg, VA:
16. Hans V, Vidmar N 1986. Judging the Jury New York: Perseus
17. Hoffmeister T 2011. Applying rules of discovery to information uncovered about jurors. UCLA Law. Rev. Discourse 59:28–42
    [Google Scholar]
18. Hoffmeister T 2012.a Google, gadgets, and guilt: juror misconduct in the Digital Age. Univ. Colo. Law Rev. 83:409–69
    [Google Scholar]
19. Hoffmeister T 2012.b Investigating jurors in the Digital Age: one click at a time. Univ. Kans. Law Rev. 60:611–48
    [Google Scholar]
20. Hoffmeister T 2015. Preventing juror misconduct in a digital world. Chicago-Kent Law Rev 90:981–1000
    [Google Scholar]
21. Jacobowitz J, Singer D 2014. Social media and the law: the social media frontier: exploring a new mandate for competence in the practice of law. Univ. Miami Law Rev. 68:445–86
    [Google Scholar]
22. Kalven H Jr., Zeisel H 1966. The American Jury Boston: Little, Brown
23. King N 1996. Juror delinquency in criminal trials in America, 1796–1996. Mich. Law Rev. 94:2673–751
    [Google Scholar]
24. Manhas R 2014. Responding to independent juror research in the Internet Age: positive rules, negative rules and outside mechanisms. Mich. Law Rev. 112:809–31
    [Google Scholar]
25. Marder N 2001. Juries and technology: equipping jurors for the twenty-first century. Brooklyn Law Rev 66:1257–99
    [Google Scholar]
26. Marder N 2010. Answering jurors’ questions: next steps in Illinois. Loyola Univ. Chicago Law J. 41:727–52
    [Google Scholar]
27. Marder N 2014. Jurors and social media: Is a fair trial still possible. SMU Law Rev 67:617–68
    [Google Scholar]
28. Miller C 2010. Bill targets web-surfing jurors. The Recorder Feb. 22. https://www.law.com/therecorder/almID/1202443956562/?slreturn=20180318132713
29. Morrison C 2011. Jury 2.0. Hastings Law J 62:1579–632
    [Google Scholar]
30. N.Y.C. Bar Assoc. 2012. Formal opinion 2012–2: jury research and social media Comm. Rep. N.Y.C. Bar Assoc. NY:
31. Powers C 2017. Textual misconduct: what juror texting means for courts. Syracuse Law Rev 67:303–28
    [Google Scholar]
32. Reich J 2015. Inexorable intertwinement: the Internet and the American jury system. Ida. Law Rev. 51:389–419
    [Google Scholar]
33. Robinson E 2011. Jury instructions for the modern era: 50-state survey of jury instructions on Internet and social media. Reynolds Courts Media Law J 1:307–415
    [Google Scholar]
34. Robinson E 2013. Virtual voir dire: the law and ethics of investigating jurors online. Am. J. Trial Advocacy 36:597–639
    [Google Scholar]
35. Schwartz J 2009. As jurors turn to web, mistrials are popping up. New York Times March 17. https://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/18/us/18juries.html
36. Shilo B 2014. Juror internet misconduct: a survey of New Hampshire superior court judges. Univ. N.H. Law Rev. 12:245–87
    [Google Scholar]
37. St. Eve AJ, Burnes C, Zuckerman M 2014. More from the #jury box: the latest on juries and social media. Duke Law Technol. Rev. 12:64–91
    [Google Scholar]
38. St. Eve AJ, Zuckerman M 2012. Ensuring an impartial jury in the age of social media. Duke Law Technol. Rev. 11:1–29
    [Google Scholar]
39. Titus L 2015. Juror, attorneys are looking at your profile: exploring the ethical implications of attorney research via electronic media. Georgetown J. Legal Ethics 28:929–46
    [Google Scholar]
40. United States v. Burr 25 F. Cas. 49, 50 (1807)
41. Vance E 2015. Should prosecutors blog, post, or tweet? The need for new restraints in light of social media. Fordham Law. Rev. 84:367–406
    [Google Scholar]