Page 23 - The People of the State of New York v. M. Robert Neulander - Brief for Amicus Curiae in Support of Defendant-Respondent

II.

evidence of
Even if

TESTIMONY
against Mr. Neulander.

Presumption of
the defendant's guilt.
Bias
Id.

18

sharing those communications with other jurors."
Mattox v. United States, 146 U.S. 140, 150 (1892).
century ago, the Supreme Court recognized that "[p
possibly prejudicial, between jurors and third persons ..
a new trial were not required as a matter of

A. Cumulative Misconduct by a Juror Gives Rise to a
a third-party during trial or deliberations are presumptively harmful.
72 A.D.2d at 839.
See also Remmer v.

]rivate communications,
IMPARTIALITY, AND THE PEOPLE CANNOT REBUT TIDS
law as the result of
held that this misconduct "created a significant risk that a substantial right of
PRESUMPTION THROUGH THAT JUROR'S OWN TAINTED
and invalidate the verdict, at least until their harmlessness is made to appear."
PREJUDICE IS COGNIZABLE, THE JUROR'S CUMULATIVE
Fourth Department properly granted a new trial without weighing the evidence
United
significant risk that Mr. Neulander's right to a fair trial was prejudiced, and the
EVEN IF THE PEOPLE'S ARGUMENT THAT THERE WAS NO
The court
defendant was prejudiced," and therefore ordered a new trial without discussing
the
Well over a
Similarly, Juror 12's misconduct created a
MISCONDUCT HERE CREATES A PRESUMPTION OF LACK OF
. are absolutely forbidden,
Juror
12's cumulative misconduct, any substantive communications between a juror and
trial about particular information relating to the defendant's guilt or innocence, and