When will a jury be found guilty of misconduct for improper contact with a witness during trial?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Stewart, 15 Cal.Rptr.3d 656, 33 Cal.4th 425, 93 P.3d 271 (Cal. 2004):
As we observed in another capital case, however, when misconduct is "`"of such a trifling nature that it could not in the nature of things have been prejudicial to the moving party and where it appears that the fairness of the trial has been in no way affected by such impropriety, the verdict will not be disturbed."'" (People v. Miranda (1987) 44 Cal.3d 57, 117-118, 241 Cal.Rptr. 594, 744 P.2d 1127.) The "trifling" misconduct at issue in Miranda, which we found to be nonprejudicial, consisted of a juror approaching the defendant's girlfriend (who attended the trial as a spectator) and thereafter, while the trial continued, engaging in extensive
[15 Cal.Rptr.3d 726]
conversations with her, displaying an obvious romantic interest. Manifestly, the facts set out in the declarations in this case demonstrate a lesser degree of misconduct than that at issue in Miranda, and do not appear to have involved anything of substance concerning the merits of the case.[15 Cal.Rptr.3d 726]
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
