Voir dire in Texas is the jury selection phase of a trial, the stretch between the panel walking into the courtroom and twelve (or six) jurors being sworn in to hear the case. The judge and the attorneys for each side question the prospective jurors about their backgrounds, experiences, and opinions, then use that information to remove jurors who cannot be fair. The phrase comes from Old French and roughly means “to speak the truth,” which captures the point: honest answers before anyone hears a word of evidence.
Texas has detailed statutory rules governing every step, and the mechanics differ between civil and criminal cases. Here is how the process actually unfolds.
Before Questioning Begins
By the time voir dire starts, the people in the jury box have already filled out a juror questionnaire developed by the Office of Court Administration under Texas Government Code Section 62.0132. It collects basics like name, age, address, occupation, employer, marital status, and citizenship. In complex or high-profile cases, courts sometimes add a supplemental written questionnaire with more targeted questions about the subject matter of the trial. Responses are confidential and go only to the judge, court personnel, and the attorneys and parties in the case.1State of Texas. Texas Government Code Section 62.0132 (2025) – Juror Questionnaire
Once the panel is seated and assigned numbers, either side can demand a “jury shuffle.” The judge orders the clerk to randomly re-sequence the panel, and the clerk prints a new list in the shuffled order for both sides. In criminal cases the authority is Article 35.11 of the Code of Criminal Procedure; in civil cases it is Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 223.2State of Texas. Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Art. 35.11
Two limits on the shuffle matter. It has to be requested before oral questioning starts, or the right is waived. And only one shuffle is allowed per case, no matter which side asks first.3Justia Law. Jones v. State Why bother? Seating order determines who is most likely to end up on the final jury. The first twelve or so seats are the ones that survive if nobody is struck, so an attorney unhappy with the initial arrangement uses the shuffle to reset the board.
Oral Questioning in the Courtroom
The heart of voir dire is the live conversation between the attorneys, the judge, and the prospective jurors. The judge usually opens by introducing the case, the parties, and the legal principles the jury will have to apply. The judge then asks broad screening questions: whether anyone knows the parties or witnesses, whether anyone has a scheduling hardship, whether anyone has a reason they cannot be fair.
Then the attorneys take over. A criminal defense lawyer might ask whether anyone believes a person who has been arrested is probably guilty. A plaintiff’s lawyer in a personal injury case might ask whether anyone feels there are too many lawsuits. The questions are open-ended on purpose, meant to draw out life experiences, attitudes, and willingness to follow instructions a juror might personally disagree with. Honest answers, not right answers, are the point.
Judges have wide discretion over how much time each side gets, and there are no statewide minimums. Time limits vary enormously. Some judges in busy urban dockets allow as little as 15 to 30 minutes per side; judges in smaller counties or complex cases may permit an hour or more. Attorneys who know they will be on a short clock prioritize the issues most likely to reveal a disqualifying bias.
What Attorneys Can and Cannot Ask
Not every question an attorney wants to ask is allowed. Texas courts draw a sharp line around what are called commitment questions, which try to pin a juror to a particular verdict based on a specific set of facts before any evidence comes in.
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals set the governing test in Standefer v. State: a question is improper if it is a commitment question and it includes facts beyond what is necessary to establish a valid challenge for cause.4Texas Judiciary. Court of Criminal Appeals Opinion PD-1488-02
Asking “If the only evidence is the testimony of one witness, could you still convict?” tries to lock a juror into a verdict before hearing anything. That is improper. But asking “Can you consider the full range of punishment, including probation?” is proper, because the law requires jurors to be open to the entire sentencing range, and a juror who cannot make that commitment is properly struck for cause. Other permissible commitment questions include whether a juror can follow the rule against holding a defendant’s silence against them, or whether a juror can disregard illegally obtained evidence. In each case a “no” answer reveals an inability to follow the law.4Texas Judiciary. Court of Criminal Appeals Opinion PD-1488-02
Challenges for Cause
Once questioning wraps up, attorneys begin narrowing the panel. The first tool is the challenge for cause, which removes a juror based on a specific legal ground. There is no cap on how many an attorney can raise, but each one must be supported by facts drawn from the juror’s own statements or situation.
In civil cases, Texas Government Code Section 62.105 lists five disqualifying grounds: the juror is a witness in the case, has a direct or indirect interest in the subject matter, is related within the third degree to a party, has a bias for or against a party, or served as a juror in a previous trial of the same case.5State of Texas. Texas Government Code 62.105
Criminal cases have a longer list under Article 35.16 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Beyond grounds that mirror the civil rules, a juror in a criminal case can be struck for cause if they are not a qualified voter, have been convicted of a felony or misdemeanor theft, are under indictment, have a mental or physical condition that makes them unfit, served on the grand jury that returned the indictment, or have already formed a conclusion about guilt or innocence that would influence their verdict.6State of Texas. Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Art. 35.16
That last ground has a built-in procedure. The judge first asks the juror whether the preformed opinion would affect their verdict. A “yes” means the juror is excused immediately. If the answer is no, the judge probes further: how the opinion was formed, how deeply it runs, and whether the juror can genuinely set it aside. When the opinion came from news coverage or rumors and the juror credibly says they can still be impartial, the judge has discretion to keep them.6State of Texas. Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Art. 35.16
Peremptory Challenges
After the challenges for cause are resolved, each side exercises peremptory challenges to remove jurors without giving a reason. The number depends on the type of case.
Civil Cases
Under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 233, each party gets six peremptory challenges in district court and three in county court. When multiple parties sit on the same side, the judge decides whether they are truly aligned or antagonistic on the issues going to the jury. If one side ends up with more strikes because it has more parties, the other side can ask the judge to equalize the numbers.7Texas Courts. Texas Rules of Civil Procedure – Rule 233
Criminal Cases
Criminal peremptory challenges are governed by Article 35.15 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and the counts are higher because more is at stake:
- Capital case with the death penalty sought: 15 strikes per side; with multiple defendants tried together, each defendant and the state each get 8.
- Non-capital felony, or capital case without the death penalty: 10 strikes per side; with multiple defendants, each defendant and the state each get 6.
- Misdemeanor in district court: 5 strikes per side.
- Misdemeanor in county court: 3 strikes per side.
Each side marks a strike list and hands it to the clerk. The clerk removes the struck names from the panel list, and the judge announces the remaining jurors who will hear the case.
Batson Challenges: The Constitutional Limit on Strikes
Peremptory strikes are powerful because attorneys do not have to justify them. The Constitution sets one hard limit: an attorney cannot use a peremptory to remove someone because of race or gender.
The framework comes from the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Batson v. Kentucky, which laid out a three-step test. First, the party objecting to a strike must show enough facts to raise an inference of discrimination; even a single strike against a member of a protected group can be enough to clear this step. Second, the party who exercised the strike must offer a race-neutral or gender-neutral explanation. It does not have to rise to the level of a challenge for cause, but it must be clear and specific to the case. Third, the judge decides whether the objecting party has proven intentional discrimination.9Justia U.S. Supreme Court. Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986)
The Supreme Court later extended the same protection to gender-based strikes in J.E.B. v. Alabama, holding that gender is also an unconstitutional basis for assuming a juror will be biased.10Justia U.S. Supreme Court. J. E. B. v. Alabama ex rel. T. B., 511 U.S. 127 (1994)
Batson challenges come up regularly in Texas courts, and judges take them seriously. A strike found to be a cover for discrimination can be denied and the juror reseated. In extreme cases a mistrial may follow, and a finding of purposeful discrimination on appeal can lead to reversal of the conviction or verdict.
If You’re the One Summoned
For most Texans, voir dire is something they encounter from the jury box rather than the counsel table. A few practical points to know.
Texas does not treat a jury summons as optional. Failing to show up, failing to complete the questionnaire, or providing false information in a request to be excused can draw a contempt fine of $100 to $1,000, and the statute notes the fine is “in addition to any criminal penalty prescribed by law.”11State of Texas. Texas Government Code Section 62.0141 (2025) – Failure to Comply With Summons If you have a legitimate reason you cannot serve, claim a statutory exemption or request a postponement through the court clerk before your report date. Judges are far more accommodating when you communicate in advance than when you simply do not show up.
When you are in the courtroom and the questions begin, answer honestly. The whole point of voir dire is to find jurors who can be fair, and a candid answer about a bias or a hardship is exactly what the process is designed to surface. Being struck for cause is not a failure. Hiding something to get on, or off, a jury is.