Cal.Sup.Ct.;
S151362

The California Supreme Court denied a petition for writ of habeas corpus. The court held that a juror's denial of any misconduct, coupled with the failing memory of the only witness to the alleged misconduct, defeated the defendant's contention that the penalty verdict in his 22-year old case was tainted by misconduct.

In 1993, Steven Bell was tried before a jury, convicted of murder, and sentenced to death. In 2009, investigator Susan Lake met with juror P.R., who allegedly told her that she and fellow juror M.H. initially voted against the death penalty and were eventually the only holdouts resisting imposition of the death penalty. On the last day of deliberations, M.H. allegedly approached P.R. in the hallway before they entered the jury room and confessed that she had broken down and spoken to her husband about her dilemma the night before, to see if he could help her out of her dilemma, and he advised her to change her vote. M.H. and P.R. thereafter both changed their votes to death. Investigator wrote out a declaration based on P.R.'s statement to her, and P.R. signed it. Relying on that declaration, Bell filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus, alleging juror misconduct.