Page 9 - The People of the State of New York v. M. Robert Neulander - Brief for Amicus Curiae in Support of Defendant-Respondent

R.2E. (
fair trial.

discussion of
correctly held:

Evidence of
is not as a matter of

quotations omitted).
At a minimum, even if
should be deemed as a matter of
inquiry with respect thereto.

received a fair trial by an impartial jury.
4

required under the federal constitution and state law.
a strong presumption that the juror was not qualified.

law unfit to have served, this kind of

fundamental to the fair and impartial administration of

court's instructions, do not lie in sworn affidavits about their
These rights are substantial and
conceal and erase their misconduct when the court conducts an
[E]very defendant has a right to be tried by jurors who follow the
own testimony, the People's argument must fail, since the testimony of
misconduct during the trial, and do not make substantial efforts to
Consequently, the People's lengthy
a criminal trial.
has disobeyed the court's instructions, lied about doing so, and tampered with
a juror who communicates with third parties and
ground on which the People can attempt to rebut this presumption is the juror's
a defendant's guilt is irrelevant to whether the defendant has
And here, where the only
As the Fourth Department
the evidence is misguided, when that evidence is immaterial to the
fundamental question whether Juror 12's misconduct deprived Mr. Neulander of
a
law unfit to have served, and a new trial is clearly
conduct must give rise to
conducts at least one prohibited internet search, and then lies about having done so,
a juror who