Juror Misconduct Law in Review is hosted by Attorney Nilgun Aykent Zahour from SM JUROR where our motto is: "Don't let juror misconduct taint your verdict." We analyze current state and federal juror misconduct cases and provide attorneys with strategies to identify, preserve and advance juror misconduct issues at trial, and on appeal, under the abuse of discretion standard of review.
What to do with the laughing juror
We examine the juror misconduct issues in State v. Baumgartner, No. 46386, 2019 WL 6463113 (Idaho Ct. App. Dec. 2, 2019) and determine what to do with the laughing juror.
Does the jury’s inadvertent consideration of the defendant’s insurance limits result in prejudicial juror misconduct?
We analyze the juror misconduct issues in Unit Drilling Co. v. Gilmore, No. 13-17-00594-CV, 2019 WL 5089763 (Tex. App. Oct. 10, 2019). Issue: Does the jury's inadvertent consideration of the defendant's insurance policy result in prejudicial juror misconduct?
Does the jury’s knowledge of publicized videotaped trial proceedings on social media prejudice the defendant?
We analyze the juror misconduct issues in State v. Rojas, No. 2 CA-CR 2018-0271, 2019 WL 4051861 (Ariz. Ct. App. Aug. 28, 2019). Issue: Does the jury’s knowledge of publicized videotaped trial proceedings on social media prejudice the defendant?
Exploring the relationship between the juror and the trial witness
We examine the juror misconduct issues in Vasquez Juarez v. State, No. 2452, SEPT.TERM,2017, 2019 WL 4187473 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. Sept. 3, 2019). Issue: In denying defendant’s motion for mistrial, did the trial court abuse its discretion in refusing to voir dire a juror who may have known a trial witness?
Is a sequestered jury's fear of not being fed an adverse influence on their deliberations?
We analyze the juror misconduct issues in State v. Kaiser, No. A17-0571, 2018 WL 2407187 (Minn. Ct. App. May 29, 2018). The issue we’re going to discuss is whether a sequestered jury’s fear of not being fed adversely influenced or pressured them in their deliberations.
Is a post-verdict evidentiary hearing required to determine a juror's competency due to admitted memory lapses during trial?
We analyze the juror misconduct issues in Daley v. J.B. Hunt Transp., Inc., 187 Conn. App. 587, 203 A.3d 635 (2019). The issue we’re going to discuss is whether the trial court erred in declining to conduct a post-verdict evidentiary hearing to determine whether a juror, who suffered memory gaps with possible Alzheimer’s disease, was competent to serve on the jury.
Informative and entertaining
Ms. Zahour’s approach to this timely topic is as refreshing as it gets. As litigators, we sometimes think we’ve “heard it all” when it comes to courtroom antics and juror behavior. This intelligent podcast covers a range of insider scenes and has a realistic flavor along with legal analysis. Law students should subscribe now and experience this entertaining trial advocacy course. I highly recommend this and would urge this podcast become a part of Law School curriculum and Continuing Legal Education programs from State to State.