Michael Wayne Hurston was indicted by a Carroll County grand jury on two counts of driving under the influence of alcohol, one “per se” count on the basis of his measured blood alcohol content and the other on the basis of his being “less safe” to drive, and two corresponding counts of homicide by vehicle in the first degree. At trial, the jury was unable to reach a verdict on either of the per se counts, but found Hurston guilty of homicide by vehicle and driving under the influence on the “less safe” counts one and three. Hurston’s amended motion for new trial was denied, and he appeals, asserting twelve enumerations of error. We find no harmful error and therefore affirm. 1. Hurston’s first five enumerations of error allege juror misconduct in numerous respects. These allegations arose during and after the jury’s deliberations. During deliberations, the jury sent out a note asking if they could go to the scene of the collision. The trial court responded that “normally that’s not allowed, but both sides have agreed that they wouldn’t object to you going to the scene, if you still want to go out to the scene, that can be arranged. . . . do you still want to go out to the scene Okay, the Sheriff’s Department has vans. They can bring those up, and take y’all out there.”
It does not appear, however, that the jurors were ever officially escorted to the scene. The trial court cautioned the jurors that “no one can make any comments at all about anything concerning this case, either on the way to the scene, or at the scene, or on the way back from the scene . . . . So understanding that, do you still wish to see if the Sheriff’s Department can get their vans over and take you out to the scene” The jury foreman responded, “Can we talk” and the trial court instructed the jury to “go back in,” but no further discussion took place and the jury ultimately was dismissed for the day.
