Rule 10. TRIALS · Last amended 1997 · Last verified July 17, 2026
In one sentenceRule 10.1 gives the trial judge discretion over the form, timing, and number of voir dire questions, allows questioning the full panel at once instead of juror by juror as long as individual responses are still captured, discourages hypothetical and legal-opinion questions, and requires individualized Witherspoon questioning with counsel input in death penalty cases.
Full Text of Rule 10.1
Text size
The court may propound, or cause to be propounded by counsel such questions of the jurors as provided in OCGA § 15-12-133; however, the form, time required and number of such questions is within the discretion of the court. The court may require that questions be asked once only to the full array of the jurors, rather than to every juror – one at a time – provided that the question be framed and the response given in a manner that will provide the propounder with an individual response prior to the interposition of challenge. Hypothetical questions are discouraged, but may be allowed in the discretion of the court. It is improper to ask how a juror would act in certain contingencies or on a certain hypothetical state of facts. No question shall be
framed so as to require a response from a juror which might amount to a prejudgment of the action. Questions calling for an opinion by a juror on matters of law are improper. The court will exclude questions which have been answered in substance previously by the same juror. It is discretionary with the court to permit examination of each juror without the presence of the remainder of the panel. Objections to the mode and conduct of voir dire must be raised promptly or they will be regarded as waived.
In cases in which the death penalty is sought, the trial judge shall address all Witherspoon and reverse-Witherspoon questions to prospective jurors individually. Prior to ruling upon any motion to strike a juror under Witherspoon, the trial judge shall confer with counsel for the state and for the accused as to any additional inquiries. Failure to object to the court’s ruling on whether or not a juror is qualified shall be a waiver of any such objection.
Plain-English Summary
Rule 10.1 leaves most of the mechanics of jury selection questioning to the trial judge. The judge can ask the OCGA-authorized voir dire questions directly or hand that job to counsel, and controls how the questions are worded, how long the process takes, and how many questions get asked. One efficiency option built into the rule: instead of asking each juror the same question one at a time, the judge can direct that a question go to the whole panel at once, as long as the format still lets the lawyer get an individual answer from each juror before deciding whether to strike them.
Several categories of questions are disfavored or off-limits outright. Hypothetical questions are discouraged, though the judge can allow them, but it is improper to ask a juror how they would act under some hypothetical set of facts. No question can be phrased in a way that would force a juror into prejudging the case, and questions asking a juror’s opinion on a point of law are improper. The court also screens out questions that repeat ground a juror already covered earlier in questioning, and can choose to question jurors individually, outside the presence of the rest of the panel.
Procedurally, the rule punishes silence. If a lawyer thinks the judge is running voir dire the wrong way, the objection has to come promptly — wait too long and it is treated as waived.
Death penalty cases get a distinct procedure for the Witherspoon inquiry, which probes whether a juror’s views on capital punishment would prevent or substantially impair the juror’s ability to serve. Those questions, in both their original and reverse form, must be put to each prospective juror individually rather than to the panel as a group. Before ruling on any motion to strike a juror on Witherspoon grounds, the judge has to confer with counsel for both the state and the defense about whether any additional questions are needed. And just as with ordinary voir dire objections, failing to object to the judge’s ruling on a juror’s qualification waives the point.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can the judge ask voir dire questions to the whole jury panel at once instead of juror by juror?
Yes, if the question is framed and the response given in a way that still provides an individual response from each juror before a challenge is made.
Are hypothetical questions allowed during voir dire?
They are discouraged but may be allowed in the court’s discretion; asking how a juror would act under a hypothetical set of facts is improper.
Can a juror be asked to give an opinion on a point of law?
No. Questions calling for an opinion by a juror on matters of law are improper.
What must happen if a lawyer objects to how voir dire is being conducted?
The objection must be raised promptly, or it will be regarded as waived.
How are Witherspoon questions handled in death penalty cases?
The trial judge must address all Witherspoon and reverse-Witherspoon questions to prospective jurors individually, and must confer with counsel for the state and the accused before ruling on any motion to strike a juror under Witherspoon.
Amendment History
Amended effective October 9, 1997.
Source & verification. Rule text and amendment history are
reproduced verbatim from the Uniform Superior Court Rules, published by the
Council of Superior Court Judges of Georgia. Last verified July 17, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as:georgia voir dire rule superior courtUSCR 10.1witherspoon questioning georgia death penalty juryjury selection hypothetical questions georgiavoir dire objection waiver georgiaquestioning full jury panel georgia voir dire