New Location, Same Tradition: Goldstein & Orr Has Moved Offices Learn More

Client Testimonials
  • "I have known Ms. Orr for over a decade and she is an excellent criminal defense attorney with high ethical standards." by Peer Attorney Read More
  • "I'm very impressed how Mrs. Orr handled everything, she is very professional and I recommend Mrs. Orr if your in need an attorney for a white collar case!!!" by Anonymous Former Client Read More
  • "The best of the best above all the rest. Accept no substitutes." by Richard R. Read More
  • "They are next level on intelligence and understanding. My full respect to these attorneys." by Amber R. Read More
  • "They're the best, very thorough." by Doug T. Read More

Challenges for Cause

Each party is afforded an opportunity to challenge any prospective panel member on the ground he or she fails to meet the statutory requirements or because of prior exposure to prejudicial information, personal biases or beliefs, education or profession. Jurors may also be challenged if, for some other lesser reason, they cannot fairly view the facts or apply the law that either side is entitled to rely upon or are otherwise prejudiced against either side. Challenges for cause are not limited in number, but rather by counsel’s ability to elicit sufficient evidence to complain. In capital cases jurors should be questioned regarding their ability to consider mitigating evidence separately, apart from any statutory elements for imposing the death penalty, and on that basis alone, if appropriate, find the defendant not guilty. See Penry v. Lynaugh, 492 U.S. 302, 109 S.Ct. 2934, 106 L. Ed.2d 256 (1989), abrogated on other grounds by Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002).

(210) 226-1463
  1. Attorneys
  2. Results
  3. Contact