Juries

Juror Note Serves as Partial Grounds for New Trial Motion

Attorneys for Amy Senser recently filed a 36-page motion to get a new trial based partially on a claim that the judge hearing the Senser case failed to disclose the contents of a juror note.  To access defense counsel's motion go here.  For previous posts on the Senser trial go here.

Juror Writes Op-Ed to Explain Guilty Verdict

A Minneapolis juror explains how the jury in the Amy Senser fatal hit and run trial reached its verdict.

Minneapolis Star Tribune: A juror'sview of the Amy Senser case‎

Juror Related Stories from the Roger Clemens Trial

CBSSports.com: Initial Clemens jurors: Retrial 'waste of taxpayer money'‎

Houston Chronicle Blog: Judge warns Clemens jurors: Stay off MySpace!‎

Washinton Post: In DC courtroom, possible Roger Clemens jurors questioned‎

The Huguely Jurors and Social Media

The article below discusses the potential distractions that face the jurors deciding the UVA Lacrosse murder case in which George Huguely is accused of killing Yeardley Love.  Of particular concern is the possibility that jurors, prior to issuing a verdict, will discuss or learn information about the case via social media.  This is one reason why defense counsel had requested jury sequestration at the outset of the trial.  This request, however, was denied. 

If the Huguely jurors for some reason ignore the court's instructions about using social media, the article offers the trial judge some practical advice from Judge Dennis Sweeney (ret.), don't "overreact."  As some may recall, Judge Sweeney had his own run in with jurors who like to interact via Facebook (corruption trial of former Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon).  Besides his experience with the Dixon trial, Judge Sweeney has also lectured and written on the topic of jurors using social media.

Baltimore Sun: In Limbo, Huguely Jury Must Avoid Distractions

 

 

 

Sandusky's Jurors May be Local

The trial judge hearing the child sexual assault charges against former Penn State football coach Jerry Sandusky has decided at least initially to use local jurors.  The prosecution had requested (against the desires of the defense) that jurors be selected from outside of the State College area to avoid the possibility of bias.  The question, however, is not necessarily settled.  According to the trial judge, "If, after a reasonable attempt it is apparent that a jury cannot be selected within a reasonable time, then I will reconsider this ruling..."

BusinessWeek: Ex-Penn State Coach Sandusky Gets Modified Bail, Local Jury

Huffington Post: Jerry Sandusky Can See Grandchildren, Granted Local Jury By Judge

 

Attorneys for Komisarjevsky Argue that Defendant's Trial Should Have Been Moved

As some may recall, Mr. Joshua Komisarjevsky was sentenced to death for his role in a deadly 2007 Connecticut home invasion.  In an attempt to set aside Komisarjevsky's 2011 death sentence, his lawyers recently filed a motion for new trial arguing, among other things, that defendant's trial should have never been conducted in New Haven.

Here are some snippets from the defendant's motion

The court should grant a new trial because, based upon the notoriety of the case, the highly publicized advocacy of the victims, the configuration of the courtroom and the emotional effect of a clearly visible Petit posse silently but powerfully advocating that the defendant be put to death, Mr. Komisarjevsky was denied the constitutional right to a fair and impartial jury...

Almost the entire pool of potentially eligible jurors in New Haven County was familiar with the case and that nearly as many had made up their respective minds that Mr. Komisarjevsky was not only guilty but also that he should be executed...

Even if some of the jurors selected did possess qualities of independence and rationality, the ambience of the courtroom, occurring as it did over numerous defense objections, seem designed to erode such independence and substitute passion for reason.  Dr. Petit and his supporters, often numbering in the scores, were segregateded on the side of the courtroom closest to the jury...Because this configuration of courtroom spectators did not allow the press, the curious, and the neutral to be mixed among the Petit advocates of death, the Petit posse, wearing the easily observable badges of solidarity (the Petit Family Foundation pins designed to honor the three victims at issue in this case), was immediately recognizable to the jury...

Profiling the Conrad Murray Jurors

Here are several articles discussing the backgrounds of the jurors deciding the fate of Conrad Murray who is charged with involuntary manslaughter in connection with the death of Michael Jackson.

Huffington Post: Conrad Murray Trial Jurors: A Look At Who Will Make The Decisions

Houston Chronicle: Houston doctor's fate lies in California jury's hands‎

ABC News: Jury in Jackson Case a Diverse Cross-Section of LA

Jury Duty and Privacy Concerns

This article discusses the privacy concerns that can arise for jurors when they sit on high-profile trials like Casey Anthony.

LA Times: Casey Anthony case casts harsh light on jurors' lack of privacy

‎

11th Circuit Rejects Wesley Snipes' Claim of Juror Misconduct

Yesterday, the 11th Circuit court of appeals in U.S. v. Snipes upheld Wesley Snipes' conviction and three-year sentence on tax evasion.  Snipes had hoped to have his conviction overturned by the appellate court because of juror misconduct.  According to the defense, the trial court had acted erroneously when it failed to investigate allegations of juror misconduct.  Specifically, defense counsel wanted to interview jurors from the trial because it had received an email from one of the jurors which stated that

three members of the jury acknowledged, during deliberations, that they had determined that Snipes was guilty before the trial began . . . to reach a unanimous verdict, the jurors compromised by convicting Snipes on three of the lesser counts, believing that he would not receive jail time.

Relying on FRE 606(b), which makes it very difficult to impeach a jury's verdict absent the showing of some type of outside influence on the jury, the trial judge denied the defense's motion.  The appellate court, relying on U.S. v. Siegelman, affirmed the trial court's decision stating that

the emails fell within Rule 606(b)’s general exclusionary provision, because that provision covers “any matter or statement occurring during the course of the jury’s deliberations.” Second, the emails did not fall within the Rule’s specifically enumerated exceptions, because they did not allege outside influence, reliance on extraneous information, or a mistake in filling out the verdict form. Moreover, even if the allegations had been admissible, the district court indicated that they did not constitute clear, strong, substantial and incontrovertible evidence of the type of misconduct that would warrant a new trial.

U.S. v. Fumo (Juror's Tweets and Facebook Posts Not Sufficient Grounds for New Trial)

A three judge panel of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals recently decided the cross appeals in U.S. v. Fumo.  The defendant, Vincent Fumo, a long standing state senator from Pennsylvania, was convicted of corruption last year.  The appellate court affirmed the conviction but remaded the case so that the trial court could reexamine the defendant's sentence.

This case is of interest to this blog because one of the jurors (#1) who convicted the defendant talked about the case on both Facebook and Twitter.  For example, prior to the verdict, juror #1 alerted his friends on Facebook to an upcoming "big announcement."  The juror also sent the following tweet: "This is it...no looking back now."  The trial court in analyzing these posts (among others) and speaking with juror #1 in camera determined that his comments were "nothing more than harmless ramblings having no prejudicial effect." 

The appellate court in reviewing the decision of the trial court largely agreed with the court's characterization of the juror's comments.  The appellate court also noted that the trial court "found no evidence that Juror 1 had been contacted regarding the posts . . ."  Finally, the appellate court strongly encouraged trial courts in the future to use the Proposed Model Jury Instructions  created by the Administrative Office of the Courts.  These instructions are the latest attempt by the federal courts to address improper research and communications by jurors.