In The Legal Intelligencer, Stephen and Kathryn discuss a case that started as a sexual assault in May 2007. The jury convicted Peña Rodriguez on three misdemeanor charges. After deliberations, two jurors reported that another juror had made several disturbing comments during deliberations and frequently expressed racial animus in the deliberations.
The trial court agreed that the comments were biased, but the harder question was whether there was any legal remedy. The court cited Colorado Rule of Evidence, specifically Rule 606(b), which prevented jurors from testifying as to any matter that arises during deliberation, as a reason not to reopen the case. Both the Colorado Court of Appeals and the Colorado Supreme Court affirmed that decision. Peña Rodriguez's lawyers appealed to the Supreme Court, and the court granted certiorari to address the split. The court heard oral argument on Oct. 11, 2016.
Read the article from The Legal Intelligencer here.