Just had a panel busted because the jurors could not put aside the prior dwi convictions when considering guilt/innocence. (Felony dwi)

Any suggestions out there on how to avoid the problem next time?

By the way, supposedly, there was a stipulation on the priors.

"Gladly accept" your burden on your VD. Now is there anyone there who would find the defendant guilty even though they had a reasonable doubt about the defendants guilt because he had prior violations of the exact same law. Is there anyone who would violate our sacred constitution and not require me to prove my case (and I do fully plan on proving it) because the defendant just keeps on violating this law over and over.

I always like the Freddy Felcman approach. Fred, the Fort Bend County 1st assistant, teaches to impress upon the jury that they only have to agree before being selected to CONSIDER PROBATION (or innocence) UNTIL SELECTED AND UNTIL THEY HAVE HEARD EVIDENCE. He tells them that 10 seconds after the trial is begun they may have heard enough evidence to find guilty and to remove any chance of probation. Just stress that as he sits there in vd, the def is as innocent as they are. Again and again stress this. "Once you hear the facts you may change your mind completely".

No matter how many times I discuss the presumption, no matter how many times I beg for those with a problem to raise their hands or forever hold their peace, when the def atty gets up and says "who thinks my client is guilty of something and can't be fair to my client", at least one person will raise their hand. I spend alot of time on this in trials where jurors would be hesitant to consider probation in any circumstance.

Remind them that they have not heard any evidence during voir dire, and will not until selected. Beat that horse until it is dead and gone, go over it numerous times. Think up some hypos where a 3rd+ dwi offender MIGHT be worthy of probation, far fetched as they may seem.

For example: Tell them this is a hypo not related to your case. Def is in a bar. There are video cameras in the bar. Because the Def has two prior dwi's, he is drinking club soda and being a very good boy. He just can't stay out of bars because that is the only place he can meet women he likes. Heck, he met his last 5 wives in bars.
Our hypo hero (def) goes to the restroom and leaves his non-alcoholic club soda sitting on the bar. During his absence, the video camera records a nefarious individual slip some form of drug or odorless/tasteless alcohol into his drink. After def is in his car on the way home, the effects of the secret additive hit him, just as he is being pulled over for an expired inspection sticker (try to avoid anything like what your driving facts are).

Doesn't that poor soul deserve probation?

How about the pilot of the plane that dropped one of the A bombs on japan in wwII. He keeps having visions of all of the lives he ruined, has had two prior dwis, but both were before he left the parking lots of the bars he was drinking in. Never caused any injuries and never had any treatment. Then, on the anniversary of the a bomb drop, he is intox, and again never leaves the parking lot of the bar he is in before being stopped and arrested. Doesn't he deserve probation for the LIVING HELL he endures every day due to service to his country?

Outlandish and farfetched, but you should be able to think up some sympathetic hypo where a jury would grant probation.

I once used a hypo about a man who killed hitler in hopes of saving the world from wwII in a murder case with particularly bad facts that led to several busted panels. It helped, and although the defense atty jumped up and down like his pants were on fire, it stood on appeal and was my first lifer.

I usually ask my felony DWI panelists whether the fact that someone does something wrong means they do that same thing everyday. Does anybody believe that because a person has driven drunk on two prior occasions that the person is drunk everytime they drive a car?

Does the fact that you got a speeding ticket in 1994 mean that you speed ALL of the time?

I still always get people who will say they can't put it aside, but then again, a lot of people don't want to serve on a jury.

Wes,

The "not want to serve" appeared to be part of the problem. Once the snowball started it just picked up speed.