A sworn juror who admitted reading part of a newspaper story about the dangers of jurors reading about the cases before them on the Internet was properly allowed to stay in the jury box, an upstate appeals panel decided.
The judges unanimously held in People v. Reichel, 104674, that seeing the Internet article did not mean the juror was “grossly unqualified to serve or otherwise engaged in substantial misconduct,” citing People v. Jimenez, 101 AD3d 513 (2012) and People v. Mason, 299 AD2d 724 (2002).
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
