Page 18 - The People of the State of New York v. M. Robert Neulander - Brief for Amicus Curiae in Support of Defendant-Respondent

unfitness.
prejudice.

consideration of
consideration of
19 A.D.3d at 508.

On similar facts, the courts of
is required, without consideration of
any possible rebuttal of
denying her misconduct; perjuring herself
13
great lengths to try to cover up evidence of
court affirmed the trial court's dismissal of

harmless error or

her wrongdoing.

courtroom and then lied when questioned about the substance of
172 A.D.2d 218, 219-20 (1st Dep't 1991) (affirming dismissal of
Guror properly discharged "because he engaged in misconduct of
that, by the post-trial hearing, Juror 12 had thereby proven herself
need to disqualify the juror).
The court did not examine any purported rebuttal of
the alleged lack of
nature by ignoring the court's admonition not to discuss the case," without
juror who
thoroughly
in her sworn affidavit; and going to
a substantial
to Juror 12, had "disregarded its instructions by discussing the case outside the
See also People v. Robertson, 217 A.D.2d 989,990 (4th Dep't 1995)
the discussion."
Yet, despite the fact
There is no getting around the fact that Juror 12 failed to follow the court's
discussed case with friend and then claimed he had not acted improperly, without
any possible rebuttal to juror's unfitness to serve); People v. Fox,
least one internet search during trial; lying to the court in chambers during trial by
the juror's
For example, in People v. Havner, 19 A.D.3d 508 (2d Dep't 2005), the
this state have repeatedly held that a new trial
instructions, by communicating with third parties about the case and conducting at
a juror who, in words that apply equally