Mu'Min v. Virginia

Mu'Min (defendant) was convicted of murder committed while on prison work-release, after moving unsuccessfully for individual voir dire and submitting 47 newspaper articles about the crime and his prior murder conviction. The trial court instead conducted collective initial voir dire, followed by panel questioning about media exposure, asking jurors who acknowledged such exposure only whether it would affect their ability to remain impartial; eight of the twelve seated jurors had acknowledged media exposure but denied it would affect their impartiality. Mu'Min was convicted, the Virginia Supreme Court affirmed, and he sought U.S. Supreme Court review, arguing the failure to question jurors about the specific content of the media coverage violated due process and his Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury.