HOUSE BILL REPORT

HB 1460

BYRepresentatives Armstrong, Locke and May; by request of Office of the Administrator for the Courts

Revising jury selection and summoning.

House Committe on Judiciary

Majority Report:  The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass.  (13)

      Signed by Representatives Armstrong, Chair; Crane, Vice Chair; Belcher, Hargrove, Lewis, Locke, Meyers, Moyer, Padden, Schmidt, Scott, Wang and Wineberry.

House Staff:Diane Noda (786-7779)

AS REPORTED BY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY FEBRUARY 1, 1988

BACKGROUND:

Washington law provides for the selection and summoning of jurors by several different methods.  A petit jury is selected randomly from an annual list of registered voters by a superior court judge.  A grand jury is selected by the court from the petit jury panel or from a panel of one hundred individuals drawn by lot in a manner provided for petit jury panels.  A jury of inquest is comprised of six persons summoned by the coroner.  In a trial for condemnation of property, if a jury trial is requested but not available, the court may wait until the next regular jury term or direct the sheriff to summon qualified persons to form a jury.

SUMMARY:

SUBSTITUTE BILL:  All courts and juries of inquest in the State of Washington select and summon jurors uniformly.

The county auditor prepares a list of all registered voters in the county.  This list is filed with the superior court at least annually.

Upon receipt of the list of registered voters, the jury administrator uses that list as the jury source list and compiles a master jury list.

The master jury list is either randomly selected from the source list or an exact duplicate of the source list.  The jury administrator of a superior court is the county clerk.

A judge or coroner directs the jury administrator of that court or county to randomly select jurors from the master jury list to be summoned.  Persons selected to serve are summoned by mail or personal service.  Summons are prepared by the jury administrator and issued in the name of the court and the court clerk.

SUBSTITUTE BILL COMPARED TO ORIGINAL:  The substitute bill provides for a study of the possible expansion of the jury source list and removes from the original bill the possible expansion by supreme court rule.

The jury administrator for a superior court is the county clerk and is not any person authorized by the court as in the original bill.  The court clerk's name appear on the summons.

An employee can bring a civil action if an employer threatens, harasses, denies promotions or discharges the employee rather than only if the employer discharges the employee.

The substitute makes technical changes.

Fiscal Note:      Not Requested.

Effective Date:Section 19 of the bill contains an emergency clause and takes effect immediately.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:    Norman Quinn, King County Superior Court Judge; Mark Oldenburg, Clark County Court Administrator; Ed Allen, Grant County District Court Judge; Andrea Dahl (in part), Association of Washington Cities; Jim Goche (in part), Washington Association of County Officials.

House Committee - Testified Against:      Mike Redman, WAPA; Darlene DeRosier, Cowlitz County Auditor; Siri Woods, Chelan County Clerk's Association; Gail Hatfield, Pacific County Clerk's Association; Sam Reed, County Auditor's Association.

House Committee - Testimony For:    The bill provides for efficient administration and statewide uniformity in jury selection.  Jury administration should be controlled by the judiciary.  The bill clarifies that a jury can be selected from the county, even if the case is within a municipality.  Penalties are provided for a person who penalizes an employee for jury service or for a person who intentionally ignores a summons.

House Committee - Testimony Against:      A judge-appointed jury administrator shifts the responsibility from the executive branch to the judicial branch.  Court clerks are effective jury administrators presently.  Too many jurors are excused for prior jury service.  The jury source list is limited but should not be expanded by supreme court rule.