King County jury system rejected

SEATTLE – A judge has ruled that the way King County assigns jurors based on geography is unconstitutional because it creates a potential for a social-economic imbalance among juries and that threatens fairness.

Thursday’s ruling by King County Superior Court Judge Cheryl Carey could affect hundreds of recent criminal cases.

In September, King County – the only county in the state with two Superior Court courthouses – began assigning jurors to cases according to where they lived: Those who lived south of Interstate 90 were assigned to cases at the Kent courthouse and those north of I-90 were assigned to downtown Seattle.

The plan made jury duty less of a hardship for citizens by reducing travel distance and commute times. The Legislature made the change possible in a law approved in 2005.

In her ruling, Carey cited case law dating to the 1800s, when a jury that wasn’t drawn from the entire county sentenced a slave to hang. Her ruling has judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys and court administrators trying to figure out what to do.

“The danger is that … on appeal, other people’s convictions will be overturned,” said senior deputy prosecuting attorney Scott Peterson, who argued before Carey, unsuccessfully, that the new rule was legal.

The case is expected to be appealed to the state Court of Appeals or the state Supreme Court.

Judge Carey said the jury division rule violates the article of the state constitution that provides people accused of crimes the right to a speedy public trial by “an impartial jury of the county in which the offense is charged to have been committed.”

“Efficiency and convenience should not be the sole consideration when determining whether individuals are being provided a random and proportional jury pool,” Carey wrote. “Such a provision is a cherished right, not to be taken lightly.”