Appellant, William Satele, Reply Brief - California Courts - State of ...
Appellant, William Satele, Reply Brief - California Courts - State of ...
Appellant, William Satele, Reply Brief - California Courts - State of ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Penal Code section 1089 - misconduct - I believe it's 1089 or the<br />
applicable section <strong>of</strong> the Penal Code - there's grounds for substituting an<br />
alternate. This court believes that the juror is guilty <strong>of</strong> misconduct, and<br />
guided by Supreme Court case <strong>of</strong>People vs. Daniel.<br />
I will do one more inquiry <strong>of</strong>Juror No. 10 before I excuse her. Would you<br />
please bring Juror No. 10 back. 15<br />
(18RT 4455:23 to 4456:1-25; emphasis added.)<br />
Following the court's ruling, counsel for appellant raised once more the<br />
question <strong>of</strong> whether the jury had reached an impasse and whether that may have<br />
preceded Juror No. 10's conversations with her mother and friend. (18RT 4457.)<br />
In response to counsel's request, the court stated:<br />
Thank you. And that is covered for the record. Just to let you<br />
know, that does not change the court's opinion, because the court is<br />
forever disclosed [sic] from doing further readbacks and reading<br />
instructions and allowing for the juror to participate. Even if the<br />
jury is at impasse 10 to 2, that does not foreclose the court from<br />
sending them back with more instructions or otherwise more<br />
deliberation. Therefore, the juror has committed misconduct.<br />
(18RT 4457:27-28 to 4458:1-7.)<br />
Subsequently, after the court dealt with another juror issue, counsel for<br />
Nunez asked that the court inquire whether the jury had reached a verdict late<br />
Wednesday. (18RT 4467.)<br />
The court responded:<br />
Mr. McCabe, just so that the record on appeal is clear,<br />
because Mr. Anthony has raised the same issue, I will give you the<br />
same response. The jury is at an impasse, and then this issue with<br />
No. 10 comes up. Regardless <strong>of</strong> whether it's Wednesday or<br />
Thursday, it forecloses this court from reading further instructions,<br />
having further readback, to have them deliberate further. In this<br />
court's humble opinion, okay, that juror has committed misconduct,<br />
regardless <strong>of</strong> what - there is no verdict unless all 12 people agree.<br />
15 When Juror No. 10 was brought back before the court, the court made no further<br />
inquiry. Instead, the court admonished the juror concerning discussions about the<br />
case with others. (18RT 4458-4459.)<br />
138