Legal Definitions - deadlocked jury

A deadlocked jury, also commonly referred to as a hung jury, occurs when a group of jurors, after sincere and diligent attempts to deliberate, cannot reach the required agreement on a verdict. Despite their best efforts to discuss the evidence and arguments presented in court, the jurors remain fundamentally divided, making it impossible to achieve the necessary voting margin (which might be unanimous or a specific majority, depending on the jurisdiction and type of case). When a jury is declared deadlocked, the judge must typically declare a mistrial, meaning the case ends without a decision and may need to be tried again with a new jury.

Here are some examples illustrating a deadlocked jury:

• Criminal Trial for Assault: In a criminal case where a defendant is accused of aggravated assault, the jury has deliberated for three days. The prosecution presented eyewitness testimony and forensic evidence, while the defense argued self-defense. After extensive discussion, eight jurors are convinced the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but four jurors firmly believe the prosecution failed to disprove self-defense. Since a unanimous verdict is required for a conviction in this jurisdiction, and despite the judge sending them back for further deliberation, the jury remains unable to agree. The judge ultimately declares a mistrial due to a deadlocked jury.

  This example demonstrates a deadlocked jury in a criminal context where the high standard of proof and the requirement for unanimity prevent a verdict, even with a significant majority leaning one way.

• Civil Lawsuit for Breach of Contract: A small business sued a supplier for breach of contract, claiming significant financial losses due to delayed shipments. The jury in this civil case needs to decide if a breach occurred and, if so, the amount of damages. After two days of deliberation, seven jurors believe the supplier clearly breached the contract and owe substantial damages, while five jurors are convinced the contract terms were ambiguous and the supplier acted reasonably. If the jurisdiction requires a 10-2 majority for a civil verdict, and the jury cannot shift their positions, they would be considered deadlocked.

  This illustrates a deadlocked jury in a civil dispute, where the inability to meet a specific majority threshold (rather than unanimity) leads to an impasse, preventing a resolution to the financial claim.

• Complex Fraud Case: A lengthy and complex trial involved multiple defendants accused of a sophisticated financial fraud scheme. The jury heard weeks of testimony, including expert witnesses and reviewed thousands of pages of financial documents. After several days of intense deliberation, the jury is split 6-6 on whether the prosecution proved the intent to defraud for one of the key defendants. Despite receiving an instruction from the judge to reconsider the evidence and try to reach a consensus, the jurors report they are firmly divided and cannot reach a unanimous decision on that specific defendant.

  This example highlights how the complexity of evidence and differing interpretations among jurors in a high-stakes case can lead to a fundamental disagreement, resulting in a deadlocked jury and no verdict for that defendant.