Deliberations in court are the private discussions where a jury weighs the evidence and decides the outcome of a case. After closing arguments and the judge’s legal instructions, jurors leave the courtroom for a closed room and work through what they heard until they reach a verdict or conclude they cannot agree. The process is tightly controlled so the decision rests on the trial record and nothing else.
What Happens Inside the Jury Room
Once the judge finishes reading the jury instructions, jurors are escorted to a private room. In most jurisdictions, their first task is electing a foreperson, sometimes called the presiding juror. The foreperson runs the discussion, manages votes, and acts as the point of contact between the jury and the court.1American Bar Association. How Courts Work – Jury Deliberations
From there, jurors review the evidence. Admitted exhibits travel into the jury room: documents like contracts and emails, photographs, and physical objects entered into the record. Jurors talk through witness testimony, compare it against the exhibits, and try to reconstruct what happened. There is no script. Some juries work through the issues methodically. Others start with whatever struck them hardest at trial.
If jurors need help, they write a note and pass it to the bailiff, who delivers it to the judge. The judge might respond in writing, call the jury back for additional instructions, or have portions of the trial transcript read aloud.1American Bar Association. How Courts Work – Jury Deliberations These exchanges happen on the record with both attorneys present.
Rules Jurors Must Follow
Deliberations operate under strict rules. Jurors cannot discuss the case with anyone outside the jury room, including family, friends, and other court employees. They cannot look up information on their own, whether through internet searches, social media, news coverage, or visits to places mentioned in the case.
The decision must rest solely on the evidence admitted at trial and the legal instructions the judge provided. Anything a juror heard before the trial or learned outside the courtroom is off-limits, even if the juror believes it matters.
What happens inside the room is also protected after the fact. Federal rules and most state laws prevent jurors from later testifying about what was said during deliberations, how votes broke down, or what influenced individual jurors. The narrow exception is evidence of outside influence, such as a juror receiving threats or consulting prohibited materials.
The Standard of Proof Jurors Apply
The standard of proof shapes how jurors approach their discussion. In criminal cases, the prosecution must prove guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt,” which the Supreme Court has held is a constitutional requirement under the Due Process Clause.2Legal Information Institute. Guilt Beyond a Reasonable Doubt Jurors do not need to eliminate every conceivable doubt, but the evidence must be strong enough that a reasonable person would feel confident in the conclusion. A juror with a lingering, well-founded uncertainty about whether the defendant committed the crime should vote not guilty.
Civil cases use a lower bar called “preponderance of the evidence.” The jury needs to find only that the plaintiff’s version of events is more likely true than not. The scale tips just slightly to one side. That lower standard is one reason civil juries sometimes reach a different conclusion than a criminal jury looking at similar facts involving the same parties.
How Much Agreement Is Required
In federal criminal trials, the jury’s verdict must be unanimous.3Legal Information Institute. Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure Rule 31 – Jury Verdict Every juror must agree on guilty or not guilty. In 2020, the Supreme Court ruled in Ramos v. Louisiana that the Sixth Amendment requires a unanimous verdict to convict someone of a serious offense in state courts as well.4Supreme Court of the United States. Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. ___ (2020) Before that decision, Louisiana and Oregon had allowed convictions based on 10-to-2 votes.
When a defendant faces multiple counts, the jury can return a verdict on the charges it agrees on and keep deliberating on the rest. If agreement on a particular count proves impossible, the court can declare a mistrial on just that count while accepting the verdicts on the others.3Legal Information Institute. Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure Rule 31 – Jury Verdict
Federal civil trials also default to a unanimous verdict, though the parties can agree in advance to accept a non-unanimous decision.5Legal Information Institute. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 48 – Number of Jurors, Verdict, Polling State courts vary more widely. Some states allow civil verdicts by a supermajority, such as five out of six jurors or nine out of twelve. In civil cases, the jury decides whether the defendant is “liable” or “not liable,” and if liable, how much the plaintiff should recover in damages.
When the Jury Cannot Agree
If a jury reports that it is stuck, the judge has a tool called an Allen charge, named after an old Supreme Court case. It is a supplemental instruction that encourages jurors to keep trying. In its mildest form, it reminds jurors of the importance of reaching a verdict and asks them to reconsider positions that might be unreasonable. Stronger versions, sometimes called “dynamite charges,” push harder for agreement.6Ninth Circuit District and Bankruptcy Courts. 7.7 Deadlocked Jury
Courts handle Allen charges carefully because they can cross into coercion. If a judge asks about the numerical split of votes before giving the instruction, courts have found the charge inherently coercive and grounds for reversal. The concern is that holdout jurors will feel singled out and pressured to change their vote rather than genuinely reconsidering the evidence.6Ninth Circuit District and Bankruptcy Courts. 7.7 Deadlocked Jury
A jury that still cannot reach the required agreement after sustained effort is called a “hung jury.” When that happens, the judge declares a mistrial. The case is not resolved, and the defendant is neither convicted nor acquitted.3Legal Information Institute. Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure Rule 31 – Jury Verdict
After a hung jury, the prosecution decides how to proceed. It can retry the case with an entirely new jury, drop the charges, or negotiate a plea agreement. Double jeopardy does not bar a retrial when the jury simply could not agree. The decision often turns on practical factors: how close the jury was to a verdict, how strong the evidence is, and whether witnesses are still available and willing to testify again.
Polling the Jury After the Verdict
After the jury announces its verdict but before it is formally discharged, either side can ask the judge to poll the jurors individually. Each juror is asked in open court whether the announced verdict is their personal verdict. If the poll reveals that the required number of jurors did not actually agree, the judge can send the jury back to deliberate further or declare a mistrial.5Legal Information Institute. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 48 – Number of Jurors, Verdict, Polling Polling catches situations where a juror went along with the group in the jury room but did not genuinely agree.
How Long Deliberations Take
There is no time limit on deliberations. Some juries reach a verdict in under an hour. Others take weeks. The length depends on the complexity of the charges, the volume of evidence, the number of counts, and how quickly jurors find common ground. A straightforward case with one charge and limited testimony might wrap up in an afternoon. A multi-defendant fraud case with dozens of exhibits and competing expert witnesses could stretch across several weeks.
Judges generally avoid pressuring juries to hurry. If deliberations run long, the court will typically send jurors home at the end of each day and have them return the next morning. The jury decides when it has reached a verdict or when it is truly stuck.
A Note on Bench Trials
Not every case goes to a jury. In a bench trial, the judge serves as both the legal authority and the fact-finder, so there is no jury room, no foreperson, and no group discussion. The judge privately evaluates the evidence, assesses witness credibility, and applies the law. The same standards of proof apply, including proof beyond a reasonable doubt in a criminal case. Bench trial decisions often come as a written opinion that explains the judge’s reasoning, which a jury never provides.