I know some legal guru, probably Bradley, Newell, Rolater or Andrea (or their brilliant ilk who post on this forum), have done some of this research or simply possess this knowledge in their brain.


What are the laws regarding consanguinity as they relate to:

Venirepersons who are related to the District Attorney, defense attorney, defendant and if applicable, the victims in a criminal case?

Venirepersons as to their relationship to each other?

35.16(b), CCP: (b) A challenge for cause may be made by the State for any of the following reasons:
2. That he is related within the third degree of consanguinity or affinity, as determined under Chapter 573, Government Code, to the defendant.

35.16(c): (c) A challenge for cause may be made by the defense for any of the following reasons:
1. That he is related within the third degree of consanguinity or affinity, as determined under Chapter 573, Government Code, to the person injured by the commission of the
offense, or to any prosecutor in the case;

To my knowledge there is no restriction on two petit jurors being related to each other, or being related to the defense attorney, the judge, or a mere witness; though these persons would normally admit a relevant bias or prejudice.

How about this from the Code of Criminal Procedure

35.16 Reasons for Challenge for Cause
[...]
(c) A challenge for cause may be made by the defense for 
any of the following reasons:
1. That he is related within the third degree of consanguinity
or affinity, as determined under Chapter 573, Government 
Code, to the person injured by the commission of the offense,
or to any prosecutor in the case; [...] 

dangit Martin's response wasn't posted yet when I wrote mine... which admittedly pales in comparison...

I was once removed from the venire under 35.16(c).

Thanks Martin. Before you posted, I thought about editing my original post to include your name, for you are surely a legal guru of this forum. Really.

Greg, I just hope my post helped (and that my answer was correct). I have seen a claim that defense counsel was ineffective for failing to challenge one of two spouses on the jury panel.

I had a jury with a father and son on it. We made sure on the record that there would be no problems with influence one way or the other before they were seated. We also had an alternate.

I've had several panels with spouses, but usually one is so far back in the panel that it hasn't been a problem.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin Peterson:
Greg, I just hope my post helped (and that my answer was correct). I have seen a claim that defense counsel was ineffective for failing to challenge one of two spouses on the jury panel.

---

Helped immensely, Martin.

I don't know why this picture came to mind when I saw this thread.....

I know, I know...
"And then he got a little older and became an investigator with the Special Prosecution Unit, wrote some books, testified in capital cases and hooked up with The Lesser Includeds. And the rest is musical history.

My wife often orders a glass of consanguinity with her meal.

quote:

---

Originally posted by David Newell:
My wife often orders a glass of consanguinity with her meal.

---

Didn't Jerry Jeff have a hit song in the 70's called "(I love that) Consanguinity Wine"?