There is no reliable average for how long juries deliberate, because deliberations range from about a minute to several months. The shortest on record ran 60 seconds in a 2004 marijuana cultivation case; the longest stretched roughly four and a half months in a 1992 federal Fair Housing Act trial in Long Beach, California. Most fall somewhere in between, and where a given jury lands depends far more on the case in front of it than on any typical figure.
If you are trying to estimate a specific trial, the useful question is not the average but what pushes deliberations up or down.
What Makes Deliberations Faster or Slower
Case complexity is the biggest driver. A shoplifting charge with one eyewitness and security footage gives jurors little to argue about. A multi-defendant fraud case with hundreds of financial documents gives them a great deal. More charges on the verdict form mean more individual decisions, and each one can spark fresh debate. When a guilty verdict carries years or decades of prison, jurors tend to slow down and deliberate more cautiously.
Jury size and the voting rule also matter. A meta-analysis of more than 200 studies found that larger juries deliberate longer than smaller ones, with a mean difference of roughly 20 to 44 minutes. Juries required to reach a unanimous verdict take longer than those allowed to return a decision by supermajority, especially when the initial majority favors conviction. The more legal theories jurors have to consider, the longer consensus takes and the more likely the jury is to deadlock.
Some quieter factors matter too. Clear jury instructions from the judge shorten deliberations because jurors spend less time arguing about what the law requires. Group dynamics inside the room can cut either way: a foreperson who keeps the discussion focused moves things along, while a single holdout can extend deliberations for days.
Criminal Versus Civil Cases
Whether a case is criminal or civil changes what “agreement” means, and that alone shifts how long deliberations run.
Criminal Trials
In every criminal case involving a serious offense, the verdict must be unanimous. The Supreme Court confirmed this in Ramos v. Louisiana (2020), holding that the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial, applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, requires every juror to agree before a conviction. Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 31 codifies the same rule for federal courts. Because a single dissenting juror can block a verdict either way, criminal deliberations often run longer.
Civil Trials
Civil trials use more flexible rules. In federal court, a jury has at least six and no more than twelve members, and the verdict must be unanimous unless the parties agree otherwise before trial. In state courts, roughly 30 states permit non-unanimous civil verdicts, with agreement by five-sixths of the jury as the most common threshold. Because a lone holdout cannot stop a verdict in those states, civil deliberations often wrap up faster than criminal ones.
What Happens Inside the Deliberation Room
After closing arguments, the judge reads the jury its instructions and sends the panel to a private room. The first task is picking a foreperson, who runs the discussion and makes sure every juror gets a chance to speak. Beyond that, there are few rigid rules. Some juries take an early straw vote to see where everyone stands; others work through the evidence piece by piece before anyone commits to a position. Jurors can review exhibits, examine photographs, and reread the written instructions.
Deliberations are not sealed off from the judge. If jurors have a question about the law, need clarification on an instruction, or want specific evidence, they send a written note through the bailiff. The judge reads it, consults both sides’ attorneys, and responds, usually by bringing the jury back into the courtroom. Jurors can also ask to have testimony read back from the trial transcript, though judges have discretion to deny these requests and the case law disfavors them because of the risk of giving one witness undue weight. Each exchange with the court adds time, sometimes hours while the court locates and prepares the material.
When the Jury Cannot Agree
If the jury reports it is stuck, the judge has a tool called an Allen charge, named after the 1896 Supreme Court case Allen v. United States. It is a supplemental instruction urging jurors to keep trying: reexamine their positions, stay open to persuasion, but do not abandon an honest belief just to end the deadlock. Critics call it the “dynamite charge” or “nitroglycerin charge” because it can pressure minority-opinion jurors into giving in. Federal courts allow Allen charges; several states have banned them.
If the jury still cannot agree, the judge declares a mistrial. That is a hung jury, and it ends the trial without a conviction or acquittal. The prosecution can then retry the case with a new jury, negotiate a plea, or drop the charges. A retrial does not violate double jeopardy because no verdict was reached.
Sequestration and the Daily Pace
Most juries go home at the end of each day and return the next morning. The judge generally lets the jury set its own pace for breaks and when to stop. In high-profile cases, the judge may order sequestration, housing jurors in a hotel and cutting them off from news, social media, and outside contact. Judges reserve this for cases where media coverage, including reporting on evidence ruled inadmissible, could taint the deliberations.
Sequestration is rare because it is expensive and hard on jurors, and when it happens it tends to lengthen deliberations. Isolation from normal life takes a psychological toll, and that can make consensus harder to reach rather than easier.