Does Washington Law Guarantee In-Person Jury Selection in Criminal Cases?

If you’ve been charged with assault in Tacoma, WA, you likely understand that you have a constitutional right to a trial by jury. But does that right extend to how the jury is selected? Specifically, does the law guarantee that jury selection—also known as voir dire—must be conducted in person?

A recent Washington appellate decision answered that question and highlighted how courts balance constitutional rights with modern realities, such as remote proceedings. At Smith & White, we believe it’s essential that every defendant understands what rights are protected—and where courts draw the line.

What Happened in This Pierce County Assault Case?

The case involved a man accused of fourth-degree assault against a family or household member after an altercation with his stepdaughter. According to court records, the defendant’s stepdaughter had found his dog running loose and brought it to her house. The next day, the defendant reportedly confronted her, leading to a physical struggle in which he allegedly kicked and struck her and prevented her from calling 911.

The State charged the defendant with multiple offenses, including assault in the fourth degree—classified as a gross misdemeanor in Washington under RCW 9A.36.041. The case proceeded to trial during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the court conducted jury selection (voir dire) remotely using video conferencing technology.

Before the trial began, the defendant objected to this remote process, citing:

Difficulty communicating with his attorney while masked.
Technical limitations of participating virtually.
Concerns about his ability to evaluate juror credibility over video.

The trial court denied the motion. At trial, the jury acquitted the defendant of the more serious charges but convicted him of fourth-degree assault.

Following the verdict, the defendant moved to vacate his conviction, arguing that remote jury selection violated his constitutional right to a jury trial.

Does the Right to a Jury Trial Include the Right to In-Person Voir Dire?

According to the Washington Court of Appeals, it does not.

The court examined Article I, Section 21 of the Washington State Constitution, which states:

“The right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate…”

However, the court emphasized that this constitutional right protects the trial itself, not necessarily every aspect of the process leading up to it. The appellate judges concluded that the right to a jury trial does not guarantee that jury selection must occur in person.

In its opinion, the court noted:

The defendant failed to demonstrate that the remote voir dire interfered with the fairness of the proceeding.
The procedures were implemented in good faith as part of pandemic safety protocols.
There was no evidence of bias or impropriety in the juror selection process.

As a result, the court upheld the conviction for fourth-degree assault.

What About Financial Penalties?

Although the court affirmed the conviction, it did remand the case to strike a victim penalty assessment based on the defendant’s claim of financial hardship. The court also confirmed that no DNA collection fee was imposed in this particular judgment.

This part of the decision reflects how courts can still exercise discretion in adjusting non-incarceration penalties based on a defendant’s ability to pay.

Why This Case Matters for Criminal Defense in Tacoma

This decision highlights a critical point: not every courtroom procedure is constitutionally protected, even if it affects how your case is heard.

If you’re facing assault charges—or any criminal charges—in Tacoma or Pierce County, you need to understand:

What legal rights are guaranteed.
What procedures the courts can adjust due to external factors.
How those adjustments can affect your defense.

Remote proceedings, including virtual jury selection, have become more common in Washington. While they’re designed for safety and efficiency, they also introduce challenges that can impact witness credibility, attorney-client communication, and juror perception.

At Smith & White, we carefully monitor how these changes affect our clients and make every effort to challenge unfair or questionable procedures.

How Can a Tacoma Defense Lawyer Respond to Remote Jury Selection?

In a situation like this, a skilled defense attorney may pursue several strategies, including:

Documenting Technical Issues: We work to preserve records of any disruptions, poor audio, or visual limitations that may impair voir dire or witness evaluation.
Objecting to Limitations on Attorney-Client Communication: If masks or remote tools inhibit confidential communication, we raise that issue for the record.
Challenging Juror Impartiality: If remote settings affect a juror’s candor or attentiveness, we can address that in pretrial motions or post-trial appeals.
Creating a Record for Appeal: Even if the court denies a motion, we ensure that all objections are preserved for future appellate review.

In some cases, these challenges can lead to reduced charges, new trials, or—when warranted—dismissal of flawed convictions.

A Hypothetical Tacoma Case Example

Let’s imagine a man in Tacoma is accused of domestic assault after a heated argument with his partner. The trial occurs during a period when courts are still using hybrid or remote jury selection methods.

During voir dire, several jurors participate from home. One appears distracted; another loses their connection. The defense team files a motion, arguing that these disruptions prevent meaningful assessment of juror credibility and violate the defendant’s rights.

The court denies the motion. After trial, the defendant is convicted. On appeal, the defense uses the record of technical issues and the absence of in-person credibility assessments to argue that the verdict was compromised. The appellate court remands the case for a new trial due to the technical issues. With the case starting anew, the defense attorney convinces the prosecutor that they do not want to go through all this effort again. The prosecutor makes a plea bargain greatly reducing all the charges and penalties.

This type of legal strategy requires experience, planning, and the ability to adapt to procedural changes.

Your Rights Still Matter—Even in Changing Times

Washington courts have ruled that the method of jury selection is not constitutionally guaranteed. But that doesn’t mean you’re without options. At Smith & White, we know how to build cases that identify procedural weaknesses, raise constitutional issues, and protect your ability to receive a fair trial.

Whether your trial is in person, remote, or hybrid, we work to ensure:

Your voice is heard.
Your rights are preserved.
Your defense is aggressive and strategic.

Accused of Assault in Tacoma? We Can Help.

If you’re facing an assault charge—whether it involves a domestic dispute, family member, or stranger—you deserve strong legal representation. Our Tacoma criminal defense attorneys handle assault charges throughout Pierce County and understand how to challenge both evidence and procedure.

Facing assault charges in Tacoma, WA? Don’t navigate the system alone—reach out to our Tacoma office today for a free consultation.