Q&A – How a Bench or Jury Trial Is Determined
Each day I feature a listener question sent by one of these methods.
Email: brianmudd@iheartmedia.com
Social: @brianmuddradio
iHeartRadio: Use the Talkback feature – the microphone button on our station’s page in the iHeart app.
Today’s Entry: Submitted via talkback. The question is in regards to Donald Trump’s New York trial asking about why Trump’s civil fraud trial wasn’t a jury trial and whether it’s a violation of due process.
Bottom Line: It’s a great question that has broad application well beyond former President Donald Trump’s current legal predicaments. The question speaks to the fundamental constitutional rights at trial all Americans have based up on the nature of the case being considered before a court. As you’re aware there are two types of trials that take place: Bench trials, or those decided by a judge, and a Jury trial, which is decided by a jury of peers. What isn’t as widely known is why some trials are bench trials and why some are jury trials. The answer rests within the Sixth and Seventh Amendments to the constitution. As stated in the sixth amendment:
- In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
The key to the sixth amendment’s right to a jury trial is stated at the onset of the amendment. There’s a right to a jury trial in all criminal prosecutions at both the state and the federal level. Civil matters fall under the seventh amendment. Here’s what it states:
- In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
That covers two key legal principles. That there is a right to a jury trial in federal civil cases (at a certain value) and the concept of double jeopardy – whereby once a verdict is reached a case may not be tried again. Unlike the sixth amendment, however you may have noticed, it left out the language about states and jurisdictions within the states. One only has a right to a jury trial in a federal civil case. That brings us to the specifics of the cases involving Donald Trump and most notably the one that’s being brought to the forefront right now as it could lead to the state of New York seizing property from Trump next week.
The New York State Fraud case against Trump, which resulted in the $355 million-dollar (plus interest) judgement against him, was a civil case brought at the state level. Thus, there was no constitutional right to a jury trial in the case. When Judge Engoron decided he’d preside over a Bench case, that followed both constitutional and state law. The four yet-to-be tried cases against Trump are all criminal cases (the federal January 6th related case, the classified documents case & the New York state hush money case and Georgia state RICO case), therefore if they are brought to trial, they’d all be decided by juries.
The very argument/sentiment expressed in today’s note is what the former president and his legal team have repeatedly derided. That effectively the way New York went about this case, based on a recently enacted law that doesn’t require a victim or losses for a judgement to be reached, could effectively be used to extort anyone a prosecutor and a judge would potentially target within the state. As Kevin O’Leary said after the judgement was announced:
We’re very worried, every investor is worried because where is the victim? Who lost the money? This is some arbitrary decision a judge made. This policy … what does this say about the bar? About the legal bar in New York? Aren’t they going to question this judge? What is this? This has nothing to do with Trump, nothing to do with Trump. Forget about Trump, this is not a Trump situation, this is a New York problem.
He subsequently said that he’d never invest within the state again and that it’s his belief that Florida and other states will further benefit from businesses and investors leaving New York due to this ruling. Now, it remains to be seen what will happen upon appeal. Perhaps some semblance of sensibility would enter the equation at that point. Of course, the bigger problem in the here and now is that Donald Trump doesn’t appear to be able to post a bond large enough to cover the judgement against him by a deadline next week. Trump’s legal team appealed to the court to waive the bond requirement for the appeal to be heard. It remains to be seen what will become of that request, but we could find out as early as today.
States have been called the laboratories of democracy. In a state like Florida, that laboratory obviously looks vastly different than in New York.