State v. Drew, Minn.Ct.App., 1/3/2017. Mr. Drew went to trial on the state's charge of being an ineligible person in possession of a firearm. It was a two day trial. Before retiring to deliberate the trial court told the jurors that they would deliberate until 4:30 p.m. and then be released until the following Monday. As the appointed hour approached, the jury sent out a note stating that they were "100% sure that they are unable to reach a unanimous verdict." The judge told them to keep at it until 4:30 and that they would then be released until Monday. After the jury left the courtroom Mr. Drew said he wanted the jury sequestered for the weekend. The trial court denied that request.
There is a conflict between the criminal rules, 26.03, subd. 5(1) and the statute, 631.09. The rule gives the trial court discretion whether to sequester a jury; the statute says that once a jury retires to deliberate they must be kept together until they reach a verdict. The court of appeals concludes that the rule takes precedence because the statute is procedural, rather than substantive. A court rule that conflicts with a procedural rule takes precedence.
Mr. Drew also make a couple of complaints about evidentiary rulings. However, because there was no objection during the trial "plain error" is the standard of review, which Mr. Drew could not meet.
No comments:
Post a Comment