Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 756.03 (2026)
Excuse; deferral
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
756.03(1)(1) Excuse. The court to which a person is summoned for jury service may excuse the person from jury service if the court determines that the person cannot fulfill the responsibilities of a juror. The court shall not consider any structural limitations of a facility when making that determination.
756.03(2)(2) Deferral. The court to which a person is summoned for jury service may, upon request of that person, defer to a later date set by the court the period in which the person must serve if the court determines that service as a juror would entail undue hardship, extreme inconvenience or serious obstruction or delay in the fair and impartial administration of justice.
756.03(3)(3) Clerk authorized to grant. The judge responsible for administering the jury system in the circuit court may authorize the clerk of circuit court to grant excuses or deferrals under this section. The authorization may limit the grounds on which the clerk of circuit court may grant the excuse or deferral and may require persons seeking an excuse or deferral to document the basis for any excuse or deferral.
Effective date noteJudicial Council Note, 1996: This proposal, implementing ABA Standard 6, repeals the concept of exclusions and exemptions under prior s. 756.02. Instead, it allows judicial excuses for persons who clearly cannot fulfill the duties of a juror and deferrals for undue hardship. Periods of required availability for jury service are set forth in s. 756.28. [Re SCO No. 96-08 eff. 7-1-97]
756.03 AnnotationExcusing and deferring prospective jurors under this section is one component of a circuit judge’s obligation to administer the jury system. The judge may delegate the authority to the clerk of circuit court under sub. (3). The task need not be by a judge in court or with the prospective juror present in person, and may take place in advance of a particular trial. A defendant’s presence cannot be required when the judge or clerk is acting in an administrative capacity under this section. State v. Gribble, 2001 WI App 227, 248 Wis. 2d 409, 636 N.W.2d 488, 00-1821.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases, 1981–2001 · leading case: State v. Gribble, 2001 WI App 227 (Wis. Ct. App. 2001).
State v. Gribble, 2001 WI App 227 (Wis. Ct. App. 2001). “The court ruled that Gribble's rights had not been violated because its questioning of the jurors was part of the court's administrative duties under Wis.”
State v. Coble, 301 N.W.2d 221 (Wis. 1981). “The legislature requires the three jury commissioners appointed in each county, sec. 756.03, Stats., to provide a county-wide list of names of persons to serve as petit jurors.”
Oliver v. Heritage Mut. Ins., 505 N.W.2d 452 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). “Section 756.03(1), Stats. Regardless of which arrangement is used, jury lists must be put together according to the tenets of sec.”
Wis. Stat. § 756.03(1): 2 cases
Oliver v. Heritage Mut. Ins., 505 N.W.2d 452 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). “Section 756.03(1), Stats. Regardless of which arrangement is used, jury lists must be put together according to the tenets of sec.”
State v. Gribble, 2001 WI App 227 (Wis. Ct. App. 2001). “The court ruled that Gribble's rights had not been violated because its questioning of the jurors was part of the court's administrative duties under Wis.”
Wis. Stat. § 756.03(3): 1 case
State v. Gribble, 2001 WI App 227 (Wis. Ct. App. 2001). “The court ruled that Gribble's rights had not been violated because its questioning of the jurors was part of the court's administrative duties under Wis.”
Wis. Stat. § 756.03(4): 1 case
State v. Coble, 301 N.W.2d 221 (Wis. 1981). “The legislature requires the three jury commissioners appointed in each county, sec. 756.03, Stats., to provide a county-wide list of names of persons to serve as petit jurors.”
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.