SW Legal Educational Publishing

Jurors' Intimidation Does Not Result in Reversal for Criminal Conviction
Description Court of Appeals affirmed motion to vacate verdict on issue of juror intimidation because the influence emanated from within the jury and not from outside sources.
Topic Court Procedure
Key Words Trials, Jury Tampering
C A S E   S U M M A R Y
Facts Stansfield was convicted on several criminal charges, for which he was sentenced to 25 years in prison. Afterwards, three jurors met with the judge and said they were pressured into going along with the guilty verdict by the jury foreman and other jurors who intimidated them. Stansfield moved to vacate the verdict.
Lower Court Decision Motion denied, verdict stands.
Court of Appeals Decision "It is a common-law rule of ancient vintage that a jury's verdict may not be impeached by the testimony of a juror concerning any influences on the jury's deliberations that emanated from within the jury room. That precept has been codified in the federal system [as part of the Federal Rules of Evidence]." Case was affirmed with respect to this issue, but was reversed in part and remanded on other issues.
Citation U.S. v. Stansfield, 101 F.3d 909 (3rd Cir., 1996)

Back to Court Procedure Case Listing

©1997  South-Western, All Rights Reserved