Mass. Gen. Laws » Part III Title II Chapter 234A
Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 234A, § 39 (2026)

Deferment or advancement of, or excuse from, juror service; term limitations; dismissal or discharge of juror

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MAmalegislature.gov (official) JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 39. The court or the office of jury commissioner shall have authority to defer or advance any term of grand or trial juror service upon a finding of hardship, inconvenience, or public necessity provided the juror recognizes his firm obligation to perform juror service on the new date. The court shall have authority to excuse a grand juror from juror service, in part or in full, upon a finding of hardship, inconvenience, or public necessity, taking into consideration the length of grand juror service. The court shall have authority to excuse a trial juror from juror service, in part or in full, upon a finding of extreme hardship; the court shall exercise this authority strictly. Notwithstanding the fact that a juror has been summoned as a grand or trial juror, with or without right of postponement of service, the court shall have the discretionary authority to require the juror to serve either as a grand or trial juror, immediately or at a future date, at the original court location or at a different court location. The court may impose reasonable conditions and limitations, including appropriate time limitations, upon a term of juror service. It shall be the policy of this chapter that every trial juror shall be prepared to serve three trial days; the court shall not grant term limitations of less than three trial days except upon a finding that extreme hardship would be imposed upon the juror in the absence of such limitation. The court shall have the discretionary authority to dismiss a juror at any time in the best interests of justice. The court shall have authority to excuse and discharge an impanelled juror prior to jury deliberations after a hearing upon a finding of extreme hardship. The court shall have authority to excuse and discharge a juror participating in jury deliberations after a hearing only upon a finding of an emergency or other compelling reason. The court shall have authority to discharge an impanelled juror who has not appeared for juror service upon a finding that there is a strong likelihood that an unreasonable delay in the trial would occur if the court were to await the appearance of the juror. At any time during the trial, the court shall discharge any juror whose term limitation has expired upon the demand of the juror except where the court finds unusual circumstances; such discharge shall not be a ground for mistrial or objection by any party. The court may exercise any authority granted in this section at any time before or during a juror's term of service.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 42 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1986–2025 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Gambora, 933 N.E.2d 50 (Mass. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Commonwealth v. Gambora, 933 N.E.2d 50 (Mass. 2010). · cites it 4× “Based on his questioning of the juror and then the court officer, the judge found that the juror was not "as forthcoming as she should have been" and that the incident raised a "troubling connection" between the juror and the defendant's family. [25] The judge dismissed the…”
Commonwealth v. Hampton, 928 N.E.2d 917 (Mass. 2010). · cites it 3× “G. L. c. 234A, § 39. We have affirmed a judge’s exercise of such discretion after the jury were sworn and after evidence was presented, where the parties learned by chance that some jurors may have an undisclosed bias against a party.”
Commonwealth v. McCowen, 939 N.E.2d 735 (Mass. 2010). · cites it 2× “" G. L. c. 234A, § 39. The facts of Commonwealth v.”
Commonwealth v. Carnes, 933 N.E.2d 598 (Mass. 2010). · cites it 3× “234, § 26B, and G. L. c. 234A, § 39. The judge discharged the juror after a voir dire and after reciting her findings of fact justifying the discharge.”
Commonwealth v. Olszewski, 625 N.E.2d 529 (Mass. 1993). · cites it 2× “The defendant also argues that the failure to conduct a hearing prior to discharging the juror violated the requirement of G. L. c. 234A, § 39 (1992 ed.), that a hearing be held in the defendant’s presence prior to the discharge of a sworn juror for reasons of hardship.”
Commonwealth v. Chambers, 109 N.E.3d 1069 (Mass. App. Ct. 2018). · cites it 2× “See G. L. c. 234A, § 39. The judge is duty bound to question potential jurors to ferret out any possible bias, prejudice, partiality, or whether there exists a substantial risk that the potential juror may be influenced by factors extraneous to the evidence at trial.”
Commonwealth v. Arana, 901 N.E.2d 99 (Mass. 2009). “” G. L. c. 234A, § 39. The latter provision contemplates circumstances where a juror seeks dismissal for personal reasons.”
Commonwealth v. Howard, 91 N.E.3d 1108 (Mass. 2017). “" The juror assured the judge that she could "put all of that aside and just look at the evidence that was presented, but I wanted to be forthright that this experience did make me think about my own experience and to inquire if that disqualifies me from participating in…”
Commonwealth v. Proia, 95 N.E.3d 285 (Mass. App. Ct. 2018). “See G. L. c. 234A, § 39, inserted by St. 1982, c.”
Commonwealth v. Garrey, 765 N.E.2d 725 (Mass. 2002). “5 See G. L. c. 234A, § 39 (“The court shall have authority to excuse and discharge a juror participating in jury deliberations after a hearing only upon a finding of an emergency or other compelling reason” [emphasis added]).”
Commonwealth v. Swafford, 805 N.E.2d 931 (Mass. 2004). “The judge also could have concluded that it was in the “best interests of justice” to dismiss a juror under G. L. c. 234A, § 39, where the juror’s comments “reflected an inability to perform [her] function as an impartial trier of fact.”
Commonwealth v. Amaral, 125 N.E.3d 22 (Mass. 2019). “See G. L. c. 234A, § 39 ("The court shall have the discretionary authority to dismiss a juror at any time in the best interests of justice").”
Show all 42 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.