Based on this pattern of payments the present allotment of $3.2 million would be sufficient exclusive of the requirements relating to the above campaign by the Department of Justice to curb the flow of drug traffic. The following table shows actual payments to grand jurors during the past ten years and the estimate for 1972: 1 Statutory increase in fees and allowances effective September 2, 1965. Statutory increase in fees and allowances effective December 22, 1968. The sum of only $3.2 million presently available. Proceedings before grand juries since 1968 have increased 55 percent from 18,891 to 29,299. Of course, the volume of proceedings are not necessarily in direct proportion to the number of days grand juries are in During fiscal year 1971 grand jurors were paid for 104,000 days in attendance. Based on the assumpsession. tion that there were on the average 20 jurors serving in each grand jury, there were 5,200 grand jury days (sessions) during fiscal year 1971. It is estimated that the sum of $14 million will be required for the fees and allowances of petit jurors. During fiscal year 1971 there were 8,026 jury trials, an increase of 6 percent over the 7,597 jury trials Petit Jurors judge power. It is expected that in fiscal year 1972 the volume of jury trials will continue to increase. The appointment in judges. of 61 additional district judges authorized by the Act of June 2, 1970, represents an 18 percent increase in It is reasonable to assume that jury trials will increase in direct proportion to the increase Based on that assumption, the sum of $14.5 million would be required for petit jury trials. new judges did not enter on duty during 1971. estimate was derived by projecting the actual cost of petit jury trials in fiscal year 1970 since all of the This juror recruitment and utilization. 1972: Fiscal Year Petit Increase Amount Percentage 8.5 1964 3,894,457 107,465 2.8 1965 4,017,561 123,104 3.2 1966 5,258,535 1,240,9741 30.9 1967 5,712,496 453,961 8.6 1968 6,166,662 454,166 8.0 1969 9,311,413 3,144,7512 51.0 1970 12,275,662 2,964,2492 31.8 1971 13,279,373 1,003,711 8.2 1972 (est.) 14,000,0003 720,627 5.4 1 Statutory increase in fees and allowances of jurors effective September 2, 1965. The sum of only $12.6 million presently available. 2 Statutory increase in fees and allowances of jurors effective December 22, 1968. 3 The Judicial Conference of the United States, at its March 1971 meeting, endorsed "in principle" the use of six-man juries in civil cases. As of September 1, 1971, 29 district courts had adopted rules reducing the size of civil juries. In some districts the use of six-man juries have been limited to only certain types of civil actions. It is expected that other districts will in time adopt or amend their rules to reduce the size of civil juries. Estimates of the savings in civil jury trials vary considerably. Many factors have a bearing on the savings potential. If, for example, the courts that have adopted six-man juries do not reduce the size of the jury panels and continue to bring in the same size panels used for twelve-man trials, little if any savings will be realized. There are also for consideration questions as to whether challenges will be proportionately higher and whether it is likely that six jurors can come to a unanimous decision more quickly than twelve jurors. Petit jury costs in some districts have increased despite the adoption of the six-man jury. Many of Improvements in juror management, hopefully, will result in additional savings. We believe that the juror productivity level can be raised without sacrificing the legitimate needs in the judicial process. the reasons for high juror overhead (non-service time) have been known for years: overestimates of daily juror needs; failure to use jury pool formulas; reluctance of some judges to stagger scheduled trial times; unbridled use of challenges; and inefficient local voir dire practices. The Administrative Office and the Federal Judicial Center are jointly engaged in the development of National jury management guidelines which will include methods and techniques for stretching juror resources. The extent of the savings to be realized will depend almost entirely on the cooperative efforts of all jury clerks and judges in the district courts. |