Page 30 - The People of the State of New York v. M. Robert Neulander - Brief for Amicus Curiae in Support of Defendant-Respondent

a single

It is unclear if
new trial); Chambers v.
extrajudicial information.
new trial is required even if
any other

discussed above, it is the aggregation of
25
296, 320 (Cal. 2014) (demonstrable bias of
Calderon, 151 F.3d at 973 (emphasis added).
demonstrates that she was unfit to have served.

"made it impossible for the appellant to receive a fair trial").
juror would violate [a defendant's] right to a fair trial."
v. Cecil, 655 S.E.2d 517,527 (W. Va. 2007) (cumulative effect of
Misc. 2d 1087, 1091 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cnty. 1983) (cumulative effect of
trial court were correct that eleven jurors had not relied on extra-judicial
Dyer v.

defendants a verdict by impartial, indifferent jurors[, t]he bias or prejudice of
the defendant's, and juror who conducted internet searches related to the case,
only one juror is likely to have been influenced by
jurors were privy to Juror 12's improper texts or
single juror was sufficient to require
information from a twelfth juror., nothing in the record allowed such a finding in
juror misconduct required a new trial, despite People's argument that examining
Because "[t]he Sixth Amendment guarantees criminal
See, e.g., People v. Sanders, 120
the acts separately led to the conclusion that defendant was not prejudiced); State
errors by juror
who advised others that children's testimony should be given greater weight than
Juror 12's cumulative transgressions that
internet search, see, e.g., R.19, but that does not mitigate Juror 12's misconduct; a
even
four acts of
See also People v. Hensley, 330 P.3d
State, 739 S.E.2d 513, 519-20 (Ga. Ct. App. 2013) (even if