colorado
argued
october
decided
march
colorado
jury
convicted
petitioner
harassment
unlawful
sexual
contact
following
discharge
jury
two
jurors
told
defense
counsel
deliberations
juror
expressed
bias
toward
petitioner
petitioner
alibi
witness
counsel
trial
supervision
obtained
affidavits
two
jurors
describing
number
biased
statements
acknowledged
apparent
bias
denied
petitioner
motion
new
trial
ground
colorado
rule
evidence
generally
prohibits
juror
testifying
statements
made
deliberations
proceeding
inquiring
validity
verdict
colorado
appeals
affirmed
agreeing
alleged
statements
fall
within
exception
rule
colorado
also
affirmed
relying
tanner
warger
shauers
rejected
constitutional
challenges
federal
rule
applied
evidence
juror
misconduct
bias
held
juror
makes
clear
statement
indicating
relied
racial
stereotypes
animus
convict
criminal
defendant
sixth
amendment
requires
rule
give
way
order
permit
trial
consider
evidence
juror
statement
resulting
denial
jury
trial
guarantee
pp
common
law
jurors
forbidden
impeach
verdict
either
affidavit
live
testimony
american
jurisdictions
adopted
flexible
version
bar
known
iowa
rule
prevented
jurors
testifying
subjective
beliefs
thoughts
motives
deliberations
alternative
approach
later
referred
federal
approach
permitted
exception
events
extraneous
deliberative
process
early
decisions
establish
clear
preference
particular
version
rule
appearing
open
iowa
rule
reid
mattox
rejecting
approach
mcdonald
pless
development
rule
reached
milestone
congress
adopted
federal
rule
evidence
sets
broad
rule
limited
exceptions
version
rule
substantial
merit
promoting
full
vigorous
discussion
jurors
providing
considerable
assurance
discharged
summoned
recount
deliberations
otherwise
harassed
rule
gives
stability
finality
verdicts
pp
version
rule
followed
every
state
district
columbia
follow
federal
rule
least
jurisdictions
recognized
exception
juror
testimony
racial
bias
deliberations
three
federal
courts
appeals
also
held
suggested
constitutional
exception
evidence
racial
bias
addressing
rule
noted
possibility
exception
gravest
important
cases
reid
supra
mcdonald
pless
supra
addressed
question
whether
constitution
mandates
exception
rule
twice
rejecting
exception
time
tanner
evidence
showed
jurors
influence
drugs
alcohol
trial
identified
substantial
concerns
supporting
rule
also
outlined
existing
significant
safeguards
defendant
right
impartial
competent
jury
beyond
juror
testimony
members
venire
examined
impartiality
voir
dire
juror
misconduct
may
observed
counsel
personnel
trial
jurors
report
misconduct
verdict
rendered
warger
civil
case
evidence
indicated
jury
forewoman
failed
disclose
prodefendant
bias
voir
dire
put
substantial
reliance
existing
safeguards
fair
trial
also
warned
reid
mcdonald
rule
may
admit
exceptions
juror
bias
extreme
almost
definition
jury
trial
right
abridged
reid
mcdonald
warger
left
open
question
whether
constitution
requires
exception
rule
juror
statements
indicate
racial
animus
significant
motivating
factor
finding
guilt
pp
imperative
purge
racial
prejudice
administration
justice
given
new
force
direction
ratification
civil
war
amendments
central
purpose
fourteenth
amendment
eliminate
racial
discrimination
emanating
official
sources
mclaughlin
florida
time
enforced
constitution
guarantee
racial
discrimination
jury
system
interpreted
fourteenth
amendment
prohibit
exclusion
jurors
based
race
strauder
west
virginia
struck
laws
practices
systematically
exclude
racial
minorities
juries
see
neal
delaware
ruled
litigant
may
exclude
prospective
juror
based
race
see
batson
kentucky
held
defendants
may
times
entitled
ask
racial
bias
voir
dire
see
ham
south
carolina
unmistakable
principle
precedents
discrimination
basis
race
odious
aspects
especially
pernicious
administration
justice
rose
mitchell
damaging
fact
perception
jury
role
vital
check
wrongful
exercise
power
state
powers
ohio
pp
case
lies
intersection
decisions
endorsing
rule
seeking
eliminate
racial
bias
jury
system
lines
precedent
need
conflict
racial
bias
unlike
behavior
mcdonald
tanner
warger
implicates
unique
historical
constitutional
institutional
concerns
left
unaddressed
risk
systemic
injury
administration
justice
also
distinct
pragmatic
sense
tanner
safeguards
may
less
effective
rooting
racial
bias
forms
improper
bias
pose
challenges
trial
process
sound
basis
treat
racial
bias
added
precaution
constitutional
rule
racial
bias
justice
system
must
addressed
including
instances
verdict
entered
necessary
prevent
systemic
loss
confidence
jury
verdicts
confidence
central
premise
sixth
amendment
trial
right
pp
bar
set
aside
allow
judicial
inquiry
must
threshold
showing
one
jurors
made
statements
exhibiting
overt
racial
bias
cast
serious
doubt
fairness
impartiality
jury
deliberations
resulting
verdict
qualify
statement
must
tend
show
racial
animus
significant
motivating
factor
juror
vote
convict
whether
threshold
showing
satisfied
committed
substantial
discretion
trial
light
circumstances
including
content
timing
alleged
statements
reliability
proffered
evidence
practical
mechanics
acquiring
presenting
evidence
doubt
shaped
guided
state
rules
professional
ethics
local
rules
often
limit
counsel
contact
jurors
experience
jurisdictions
already
recognized
exception
rule
experience
courts
going
forward
inform
proper
exercise
trial
judge
discretion
need
address
procedures
trial
must
follow
confronted
motion
new
trial
based
juror
testimony
racial
bias
appropriate
standard
determining
evidence
sufficient
require
verdict
set
aside
new
trial
granted
standard
existing
safeguards
may
also
help
prevent
racial
bias
jury
deliberations
including
careful
voir
dire
trial
instructions
jurors
duty
review
evidence
deliberate
together
reach
verdict
fair
impartial
way
free
bias
kind
pp
reversed
remanded
kennedy
delivered
opinion
ginsburg
breyer
sotomayor
kagan
joined
thomas
filed
dissenting
opinion
alito
filed
dissenting
opinion
roberts
thomas
joined
opinion
notice
opinion
subject
formal
revision
publication
preliminary
print
reports
readers
requested
notify
reporter
decisions
washington
typographical
formal
errors
order
corrections
may
made
preliminary
print
goes
press
miguel
angel
petitioner
colorado
writ
certiorari
colorado
march
justice
kennedy
delivered
opinion
jury
central
foundation
justice
system
democracy
whatever
imperfections
particular
case
jury
necessary
check
governmental
power
jury
centuries
inspired
trusted
effective
instrument
resolving
factual
disputes
determining
ultimate
questions
guilt
innocence
criminal
cases
long
course
judgments
find
acceptance
community
acceptance
essential
respect
rule
law
jury
tangible
implementation
principle
law
comes
people
era
nation
founding
right
jury
trial
already
existed
evolved
centuries
alongside
common
law
jury
considered
fundamental
safeguard
individual
liberty
see
federalist
warner
ed
hamilton
right
jury
trial
criminal
cases
part
constitution
first
drawn
restated
sixth
amendment
art
iii
cl
amdt
operation
fourteenth
amendment
applicable
duncan
louisiana
like
human
institutions
jury
system
flaws
yet
experience
shows
fair
impartial
verdicts
reached
jury
follows
instructions
undertakes
deliberations
honest
candid
robust
based
common
sense
general
rule
evolved
give
substantial
protection
verdict
finality
assure
jurors
verdict
entered
later
called
question
based
comments
conclusions
expressed
deliberations
principle
centuries
old
often
referred
rule
instant
case
presents
question
whether
exception
rule
jury
discharged
juror
comes
forward
compelling
evidence
another
juror
made
clear
explicit
statements
indicating
racial
animus
significant
motivating
factor
vote
convict
state
prosecutors
colorado
brought
criminal
charges
petitioner
miguel
angel
based
following
allegations
bathroom
colorado
facility
man
sexually
assaulted
two
teenage
sisters
girls
told
father
identified
man
employee
racetrack
police
located
arrested
petitioner
girl
separately
identified
petitioner
man
assaulted
state
charged
petitioner
harassment
unlawful
sexual
contact
attempted
sexual
assault
child
jury
empaneled
members
venire
repeatedly
asked
whether
believed
fair
impartial
case
written
questionnaire
asked
anything
feel
make
difficult
fair
juror
app
repeated
question
panel
prospective
jurors
encouraged
jurors
speak
private
concerns
impartiality
defense
counsel
likewise
asked
whether
anyone
felt
simply
good
case
fair
juror
none
empaneled
jurors
expressed
reservations
based
racial
bias
none
asked
speak
trial
judge
trial
jury
found
petitioner
guilty
unlawful
sexual
contact
harassment
failed
reach
verdict
attempted
sexual
assault
charge
jury
discharged
gave
instruction
mandated
colorado
law
question
may
arise
whether
may
discuss
case
lawyers
defendant
persons
guidance
instructs
whether
talk
anyone
entirely
decision
person
persists
discussing
case
objection
becomes
critical
service
either
discussion
begun
please
report
following
discharge
jury
petitioner
counsel
entered
jury
room
discuss
trial
jurors
room
emptying
two
jurors
remained
speak
counsel
private
stated
deliberations
another
juror
expressed
bias
toward
petitioner
petitioner
alibi
witness
petitioner
counsel
reported
supervision
obtained
sworn
affidavits
two
jurors
affidavits
two
jurors
described
number
biased
statements
made
another
juror
identified
juror
according
two
jurors
told
jurors
believed
defendant
guilty
experience
enforcement
officer
mexican
men
bravado
caused
believe
whatever
wanted
women
jurors
reported
stated
belief
mexican
men
physically
controlling
women
sense
entitlement
stated
think
mexican
mexican
men
take
whatever
want
according
jurors
explained
experience
nine
times
ten
mexican
men
guilty
aggressive
toward
women
young
girls
finally
jurors
recounted
juror
said
find
petitioner
alibi
witness
credible
among
things
witness
illegal
ibid
fact
witness
testified
trial
legal
resident
reviewing
affidavits
trial
acknowledged
apparent
bias
denied
petitioner
motion
new
trial
noting
actual
deliberations
occur
among
jurors
protected
inquiry
colorado
rule
evidence
like
federal
counterpart
colorado
rule
generally
prohibits
juror
testifying
statement
made
deliberations
proceeding
inquiring
validity
verdict
see
fed
rule
evid
colorado
rule
reads
follows
inquiry
validity
verdict
indictment
upon
inquiry
validity
verdict
indictment
juror
may
testify
matter
statement
occurring
course
jury
deliberations
effect
anything
upon
juror
mind
emotions
influencing
assent
dissent
verdict
indictment
concerning
mental
processes
connection
therewith
juror
may
testify
whether
extraneous
prejudicial
information
improperly
brought
jurors
attention
whether
outside
influence
improperly
brought
bear
upon
juror
whether
mistake
entering
verdict
onto
verdict
form
juror
affidavit
evidence
statement
juror
may
received
matter
juror
precluded
testifying
rule
evid
verdict
deemed
final
petitioner
sentenced
two
years
probation
required
register
sex
offender
divided
panel
colorado
appeals
affirmed
petitioner
conviction
agreeing
alleged
statements
fall
within
exception
rule
inadmissible
undermine
validity
verdict
wl
colorado
affirmed
vote
prevailing
opinion
relied
two
decisions
rejecting
constitutional
challenges
federal
rule
applied
evidence
juror
misconduct
bias
see
tanner
warger
shauers
reviewing
precedents
find
dividing
line
different
types
juror
bias
misconduct
thus
basis
permitting
impeachment
verdicts
petitioner
trial
notwithstanding
apparent
racial
bias
granted
certiorari
decide
whether
constitutional
exception
rule
instances
racial
bias
juror
bias
based
petitioner
hispanic
identity
prior
cases
referred
ethnicity
may
instructive
term
see
hernandez
new
york
plurality
opinion
yet
also
used
language
race
discussing
relevant
constitutional
principles
cases
involving
hispanic
persons
see
ibid
fisher
university
tex
austin
plurality
opinion
petitioner
respondent
refer
race
race
ethnicity
expansive
sense
briefs
opinion
refers
nature
bias
racial
keeping
primary
terminology
employed
parties
used
precedents
ii
common
law
jurors
forbidden
impeach
verdict
either
affidavit
live
testimony
rule
originated
vaise
delaval
eng
lord
mansfield
excluded
juror
testimony
jury
decided
case
game
chance
mansfield
rule
came
known
prohibited
jurors
verdict
entered
testifying
either
subjective
mental
processes
objective
events
occurred
deliberations
american
courts
adopted
mansfield
rule
matter
common
law
though
every
detail
jurisdictions
adopted
different
flexible
version
bar
known
iowa
rule
rule
jurors
prevented
testifying
subjective
beliefs
thoughts
motives
deliberations
see
wright
illinois
miss
tel
iowa
jurors
however
testify
objective
facts
events
occurring
deliberations
part
jurors
corroborate
testimony
alternative
approach
later
referred
federal
approach
stayed
closer
original
mansfield
rule
see
warger
supra
slip
version
rule
bar
permitted
exception
testimony
events
extraneous
deliberative
process
reliance
outside
evidence
newspapers
dictionaries
like
personal
investigation
facts
early
decisions
establish
clear
preference
particular
version
rule
reid
appeared
open
admission
juror
testimony
jurors
consulted
newspapers
deliberations
end
barred
evidence
newspapers
slightest
influence
verdict
reid
warned
juror
testimony
always
received
great
caution
ibid
yet
added
important
admonition
cases
might
arise
impossible
refuse
juror
testimony
without
violating
plainest
principles
justice
ibid
following
case
required
admission
juror
affidavits
stating
jury
consulted
information
evidence
including
prejudicial
newspaper
article
mattox
suggested
furthermore
admission
juror
testimony
might
governed
flexible
rule
one
permitting
jury
testimony
even
involve
consultation
prejudicial
extraneous
information
see
also
hyde
stating
flexible
iowa
rule
apply
excluding
evidence
jury
reached
verdict
trading
certain
defendants
acquittals
others
convictions
later
however
rejected
lenient
iowa
rule
mcdonald
pless
affirmed
exclusion
juror
testimony
objective
events
jury
room
jury
allegedly
calculated
damages
award
averaging
numerical
submissions
member
explained
admitting
evidence
dangerous
consequences
verdict
safe
practice
open
door
pernicious
arts
tampering
jurors
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
yet
reiterated
admonition
reid
cautioning
rule
might
recognize
exceptions
gravest
important
cases
exclusion
juror
affidavits
might
well
violate
plainest
principles
justice
quoting
reid
supra
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
development
rule
reached
milestone
congress
adopted
federal
rules
evidence
including
rule
congress
like
mcdonald
rejected
iowa
rule
instead
endorsed
broad
rule
limited
exceptions
version
rule
congress
adopted
accident
warger
slip
advisory
committee
first
drafted
rule
reflecting
iowa
approach
prohibiting
admission
juror
testimony
related
jurors
mental
processes
reaching
verdict
department
justice
however
expressed
concern
preliminary
rule
advisory
committee
drafted
stringent
version
effect
prohibiting
juror
testimony
exceptions
jury
considered
prejudicial
extraneous
evidence
subject
outside
influence
rules
evidence
courts
magistrates
adopted
second
version
transmitted
congress
house
favored
iowa
approach
senate
expressed
concern
sufficiently
address
public
policy
interest
finality
verdicts
pp
siding
senate
conference
committee
adopted
congress
enacted
president
signed
proposed
rule
substance
rule
changed
since
except
modification
permitting
evidence
clerical
mistake
verdict
form
see
current
version
rule
follows
prohibited
testimony
evidence
inquiry
validity
verdict
indictment
juror
may
testify
statement
made
incident
occurred
jury
deliberations
effect
anything
juror
another
juror
vote
juror
mental
processes
concerning
verdict
indictment
may
receive
juror
affidavit
evidence
juror
statement
matters
exceptions
juror
may
testify
whether
extraneous
prejudicial
information
improperly
brought
jury
attention
outside
influence
improperly
brought
bear
juror
mistake
made
entering
verdict
verdict
form
version
rule
substantial
merit
promotes
full
vigorous
discussion
providing
jurors
considerable
assurance
discharged
summoned
recount
deliberations
otherwise
harassed
annoyed
litigants
seeking
challenge
verdict
rule
gives
stability
finality
verdicts
version
rule
followed
every
state
district
columbia
variations
make
classification
imprecise
general
matter
appears
jurisdictions
follow
federal
rule
follow
iowa
rule
within
classifications
diversity
approaches
nine
jurisdictions
follow
federal
rule
codified
exceptions
listed
federal
rule
see
appendix
infra
least
jurisdictions
follow
federal
rule
recognized
exception
bar
circumstances
faces
juror
testimony
racial
bias
played
part
deliberations
ibid
according
parties
amici
one
state
colorado
addressed
issue
declined
recognize
exception
racial
bias
see
commonwealth
steele
federal
courts
part
governed
federal
rule
interpretations
deserve
comment
various
courts
appeals
occasion
consider
racial
bias
exception
reached
different
conclusions
three
held
suggested
constitutional
exception
evidence
racial
bias
see
villar
holding
constitution
demands
exception
henley
finding
persuasive
arguments
favor
exception
deciding
issue
shillcutt
gagnon
observing
cases
fundamental
fairness
require
exception
one
appeals
declined
find
exception
reasoning
safeguards
inherent
trial
process
suffice
protect
defendants
constitutional
interests
see
benally
another
suggested
much
holding
habeas
context
exception
racial
bias
clearly
established
indicating
dicta
exception
exists
see
williams
price
alito
one
appeals
held
evidence
racial
bias
excluded
rule
without
addressing
whether
constitution
may
times
demand
exception
see
martinez
food
city
addressing
scope
rule
rule
adoption
reid
mcdonald
courts
noted
possibility
exception
rule
gravest
important
cases
reid
mcdonald
yet
since
enactment
rule
addressed
precise
question
whether
constitution
mandates
exception
two
instances
first
case
tanner
rejected
sixth
amendment
exception
evidence
jurors
influence
drugs
alcohol
trial
central
reasoning
substantial
concerns
supporting
protection
jury
deliberations
intrusive
inquiry
tanner
echoed
mcdonald
concern
attorneys
use
juror
testimony
attack
verdicts
jurors
harassed
beset
defeated
party
thus
destroying
frankness
freedom
discussion
conference
quoting
mcdonald
supra
concerned
moreover
attempts
impeach
verdict
disrupt
finality
process
undermine
jurors
willingness
return
unpopular
verdict
community
trust
system
relies
decisions
laypeople
tanner
outlined
existing
significant
safeguards
defendant
right
impartial
competent
jury
beyond
juror
testimony
outset
trial
process
voir
dire
provides
opportunity
counsel
examine
members
venire
impartiality
trial
proceeds
counsel
personnel
opportunity
learn
juror
misconduct
verdict
jurors
report
misconduct
procedures
undermine
stability
verdict
rendered
even
trial
evidence
misconduct
juror
testimony
used
attempt
impeach
verdict
balancing
interests
safeguards
defendant
sixth
amendment
interest
case
affirmed
exclusion
affidavits
pertaining
jury
inebriated
state
ibid
second
case
consider
general
issue
presented
warger
rejected
argument
circumstances
jury
trial
right
required
exception
rule
warger
involved
civil
case
verdict
entered
losing
party
sought
proffer
evidence
jury
forewoman
failed
disclose
prodefendant
bias
voir
dire
tanner
put
substantial
reliance
existing
safeguards
fair
trial
stated
even
jurors
lie
voir
dire
way
conceals
bias
juror
impartiality
adequately
assured
parties
ability
bring
attention
evidence
bias
verdict
rendered
employ
nonjuror
evidence
even
verdict
rendered
slip
warger
however
reiterate
rule
may
admit
exceptions
reid
mcdonald
warned
juror
bias
extreme
almost
definition
jury
trial
right
abridged
slip
case
arises
indicated
consider
whether
usual
safeguards
sufficient
protect
integrity
process
ibid
recognition
warger
may
extreme
cases
jury
trial
right
requires
exception
rule
must
interpreted
context
guarded
cautious
statement
caution
warranted
avoid
formulating
exception
might
undermine
jury
dynamics
finality
interests
rule
seeks
protect
today
however
faces
question
reid
mcdonald
warger
left
open
must
decide
whether
constitution
requires
exception
rule
juror
statements
indicate
racial
animus
significant
motivating
factor
finding
guilt
iii
must
become
heritage
nation
rise
racial
classifications
inconsistent
commitment
equal
dignity
persons
imperative
purge
racial
prejudice
administration
justice
given
new
force
direction
ratification
civil
war
amendments
central
purpose
fourteenth
amendment
eliminate
racial
discrimination
emanating
official
sources
mclaughlin
florida
years
ratification
fourteenth
amendment
became
clear
racial
discrimination
jury
system
posed
particular
threat
promise
amendment
integrity
jury
trial
almost
immediately
civil
war
south
began
practice
continue
many
decades
juries
punished
black
defendants
particularly
harshly
simultaneously
refusing
punish
violence
whites
including
ku
klux
klan
members
blacks
republicans
forman
juries
race
nineteenth
century
yale
take
one
example
years
juries
texas
decided
total
prosecutions
white
defendants
charged
killing
acquitted
stark
unapologetic
nature
outcomes
challenged
american
belief
jury
bulwark
liberty
prompted
congress
pass
legislation
integrate
jury
system
bar
persons
eligibility
jury
service
conspired
deny
civil
rights
members
congress
stressed
legislation
necessary
preserve
right
fair
trial
guarantee
equal
protection
laws
ibid
duty
confront
racial
animus
justice
system
legislature
alone
time
called
upon
enforce
constitution
guarantee
racial
discrimination
jury
system
beginning
interpreted
fourteenth
amendment
prohibit
exclusion
jurors
basis
race
strauder
west
virginia
repeatedly
struck
laws
practices
systematically
exclude
racial
minorities
juries
see
neal
delaware
hollins
oklahoma
per
curiam
avery
georgia
hernandez
texas
castaneda
partida
guard
discrimination
jury
selection
ruled
litigant
may
exclude
prospective
juror
basis
race
batson
kentucky
edmonson
leesville
concrete
georgia
mccollum
effort
ensure
individuals
sit
juries
free
racial
bias
held
constitution
times
demands
defendants
permitted
ask
questions
racial
bias
voir
dire
ham
south
carolina
turner
murray
unmistakable
principle
underlying
precedents
discrimination
basis
race
odious
aspects
especially
pernicious
administration
justice
rose
mitchell
jury
criminal
defendant
fundamental
life
liberty
race
color
prejudice
mccleskey
kemp
quoting
strauder
supra
permitting
racial
prejudice
jury
system
damages
fact
perception
jury
role
vital
check
wrongful
exercise
power
state
powers
ohio
cf
aldridge
buck
davis
ante
iv
case
lies
intersection
decisions
endorsing
rule
decisions
seeking
eliminate
racial
bias
jury
system
two
lines
precedent
however
need
conflict
racial
bias
kind
alleged
case
differs
critical
ways
compromise
verdict
mcdonald
drug
alcohol
abuse
tanner
bias
warger
behavior
cases
troubling
unacceptable
involved
anomalous
behavior
single
jury
juror
gone
course
jurors
presumed
follow
oath
cf
penry
johnson
neither
history
common
experience
show
jury
system
rife
mischief
similar
kinds
attempt
rid
jury
every
irregularity
sort
expose
unrelenting
scrutiny
clear
jury
system
survive
efforts
perfect
tanner
said
racial
bias
familiar
recurring
evil
left
unaddressed
risk
systemic
injury
administration
justice
decisions
demonstrate
racial
bias
implicates
unique
historical
constitutional
institutional
concerns
effort
address
grave
serious
statements
racial
bias
effort
perfect
jury
ensure
legal
system
remains
capable
coming
ever
closer
promise
equal
treatment
law
central
functioning
democracy
racial
bias
distinct
pragmatic
sense
well
past
cases
relied
safeguards
protect
right
impartial
jury
safeguards
sure
disclose
racial
bias
voir
dire
outset
trial
observation
juror
demeanor
conduct
trial
juror
reports
verdict
nonjuror
evidence
trial
important
mechanisms
discovering
bias
yet
operation
may
compromised
may
prove
insufficient
instance
noted
dilemma
faced
trial
judges
counsel
deciding
whether
explore
potential
racial
bias
voir
dire
see
supra
ristaino
ross
generic
questions
juror
impartiality
may
expose
specific
attitudes
biases
poison
jury
deliberations
yet
pointed
questions
well
exacerbate
whatever
prejudice
might
exist
without
substantially
aiding
exposing
supra
rehnquist
concurring
result
stigma
attends
racial
bias
may
make
difficult
juror
report
inappropriate
statements
course
juror
deliberations
one
thing
accuse
fellow
juror
personal
experience
improperly
influences
consideration
case
required
warger
quite
another
call
bigot
recognition
certain
tanner
safeguards
may
less
effective
rooting
racial
bias
kinds
bias
dispositive
forms
improper
bias
pose
challenges
trial
process
sound
basis
treat
racial
bias
added
precaution
constitutional
rule
racial
bias
justice
system
must
addressed
including
instances
verdict
entered
necessary
prevent
systemic
loss
confidence
jury
verdicts
confidence
central
premise
sixth
amendment
trial
right
reasons
explained
holds
juror
makes
clear
statement
indicates
relied
racial
stereotypes
animus
convict
criminal
defendant
sixth
amendment
requires
rule
give
way
order
permit
trial
consider
evidence
juror
statement
resulting
denial
jury
trial
guarantee
every
offhand
comment
indicating
racial
bias
hostility
justify
setting
aside
bar
allow
judicial
inquiry
inquiry
proceed
must
showing
one
jurors
made
statements
exhibiting
overt
racial
bias
cast
serious
doubt
fairness
impartiality
jury
deliberations
resulting
verdict
qualify
statement
must
tend
show
racial
animus
significant
motivating
factor
juror
vote
convict
whether
threshold
showing
satisfied
matter
committed
substantial
discretion
trial
light
circumstances
including
content
timing
alleged
statements
reliability
proffered
evidence
practical
mechanics
acquiring
presenting
evidence
doubt
shaped
guided
state
rules
professional
ethics
local
rules
often
limit
counsel
contact
jurors
see
wright
gold
federal
practice
procedure
evidence
pp
ed
wright
see
also
variations
aba
model
rules
professional
conduct
rule
overview
state
ethics
rules
jurywork
systematic
techniques
overview
federal
district
rules
limits
seek
provide
jurors
protection
return
daily
affairs
verdict
entered
juror
always
tell
counsel
wish
discuss
case
jurors
instances
may
come
forward
accord
happened
case
alleged
statements
juror
egregious
unmistakable
reliance
racial
bias
juror
deploy
dangerous
racial
stereotype
conclude
petitioner
guilty
alibi
witness
believed
also
encouraged
jurors
join
convicting
basis
petitioner
counsel
seek
two
jurors
allegations
racial
bias
pursuant
colorado
mandatory
jury
instruction
trial
set
limits
juror
contact
encouraged
jurors
inform
anyone
harassed
role
case
similar
limits
juror
contact
found
jurisdictions
recognize
exception
see
standard
jury
instrs
crim
cases
west
although
liberty
speak
anyone
deliberations
also
liberty
refuse
speak
anyone
mass
office
jury
trial
juror
handbook
required
speak
anyone
trial
anyone
tries
learn
confidential
information
feel
harassed
embarrassed
way
report
immediately
crim
model
jury
charges
non
charges
dismissal
jury
decide
whether
speak
service
juror
understanding
obligation
speak
jurors
approached
petitioner
counsel
within
short
time
verdict
relay
concerns
statements
app
similar
pattern
common
cases
involving
juror
allegations
racial
bias
see
villar
juror
defense
counsel
within
hours
verdict
kittle
juror
wrote
letter
judge
day
discharged
jury
benally
juror
approached
defense
counsel
day
jury
announced
verdict
pursuant
local
rules
petitioner
counsel
sought
received
permission
contact
two
jurors
obtain
affidavits
limited
recounting
exact
statements
made
exhibited
racial
bias
trial
concluded
colorado
rule
permit
even
consider
resulting
affidavits
holding
today
removes
bar
jurors
disclose
instance
racial
bias
serious
one
involved
case
law
must
wholly
disregard
occurrence
preceding
discussion
makes
clear
relies
experiences
jurisdictions
recognized
exception
rule
half
century
signs
increase
juror
harassment
loss
juror
willingness
engage
searching
candid
deliberations
experience
jurisdictions
experience
courts
going
forward
inform
proper
exercise
trial
judge
discretion
related
matters
case
ask
need
address
procedures
trial
must
follow
confronted
motion
new
trial
based
juror
testimony
racial
bias
see
wright
noting
divergence
authority
necessity
scope
evidentiary
hearing
alleged
juror
misconduct
also
decide
appropriate
standard
determining
evidence
racial
bias
sufficient
require
verdict
set
aside
new
trial
granted
compare
shillcutt
inquiring
whether
racial
bias
pervaded
jury
room
henley
one
racist
juror
enough
proper
observe
well
standard
existing
processes
designed
prevent
racial
bias
jury
deliberations
advantages
careful
voir
dire
already
noted
safeguards
deserve
mention
trial
courts
often
outset
case
final
jury
instructions
explain
jurors
duty
review
evidence
reach
verdict
fair
impartial
way
free
bias
kind
instructions
framed
trial
judges
based
learning
experience
model
jury
instructions
likely
take
account
continuing
developments
common
across
jurisdictions
see
grenig
lee
federal
jury
practice
instructions
criminal
ed
perform
duties
fairly
let
bias
sympathy
prejudice
may
feel
toward
one
side
influence
decision
way
instructions
may
emphasize
group
dynamic
deliberations
urging
jurors
share
questions
conclusions
colleagues
see
duty
jurors
consult
one
another
deliberate
one
another
view
towards
reaching
agreement
without
violence
individual
judgment
probing
thoughtful
deliberation
improves
likelihood
jurors
confront
flawed
nature
reasoning
prompted
influenced
improper
biases
whether
racial
otherwise
dynamics
help
ensure
exception
limited
rare
cases
nation
must
continue
make
strides
overcome
discrimination
progress
already
made
underlies
insistence
blatant
racial
prejudice
antithetical
functioning
jury
system
must
confronted
egregious
cases
like
one
despite
general
bar
rule
mark
maturing
legal
system
seeks
understand
implement
lessons
history
seeks
strengthen
broader
principle
society
must
move
forward
achieving
thoughtful
rational
dialogue
foundation
jury
system
free
society
sustains
constitution
judgment
colorado
reversed
case
remanded
proceedings
inconsistent
opinion
ordered
appendix
codified
exceptions
addition
enumerated
fed
rule
evid
see
rules
crim
proc
exception
evidence
misconduct
including
verdict
game
chance
intoxication
idaho
rule
evid
game
chance
ind
rule
evid
burns
drug
alcohol
use
rule
evid
threats
violence
violent
acts
mont
rule
evid
game
chance
rule
evid
rule
evid
quotient
verdict
game
chance
tex
rule
evid
west
rebutting
claim
juror
unqualified
rule
evid
cum
supp
juror
communication
nonjuror
see
also
wright
gold
federal
practice
procedure
evidence
ed
judicially
recognized
exceptions
evidence
racial
bias
see
state
santiago
kittle
fisher
state
del
appendix
opinion
powell
allstate
ins
spencer
state
state
jackson
haw
commonwealth
laguer
mass
state
callender
fleshner
pepose
vision
mo
state
levitt
people
rukaj
app
div
state
hidanovic
nd
state
brown
state
hunter
seattle
jackson
hour
welding
laneil
management
thomas
dissenting
miguel
angel
petitioner
colorado
writ
certiorari
colorado
march
justice
thomas
dissenting
today
holds
sixth
amendment
requires
provide
criminal
defendant
opportunity
impeach
jury
guilty
verdict
juror
testimony
juror
alleged
racial
bias
notwithstanding
state
procedural
rule
forbidding
testimony
agree
justice
alito
decision
incompatible
text
amendment
purports
interpret
precedents
write
separately
explain
holding
also
squared
original
understanding
sixth
fourteenth
amendments
sixth
amendment
protection
right
criminal
prosecutions
trial
impartial
jury
limited
protections
existed
common
law
amendment
ratified
see
apprendi
new
jersey
thomas
concurring
story
commentaries
constitution
pp
story
explaining
trial
jury
criminal
cases
protected
constitution
great
privilege
part
admirable
common
law
england
cf
tucker
blackstone
commentaries
therefore
entirely
proper
look
common
law
ascertain
whether
sixth
amendment
requires
result
today
reaches
apprendi
supra
sixth
amendment
specific
guarantee
impartiality
incorporates
understanding
term
see
blackstone
commentaries
laws
england
blackstone
describing
english
trials
impartially
caution
partiality
bias
jury
common
law
required
juror
freedome
mind
indifferent
hee
stands
unsworne
coke
first
part
institutes
laws
england
ed
accord
bacon
new
abridgment
law
ed
cf
cooley
treatise
constitutional
limitations
rest
upon
legislative
power
american
union
jury
must
indifferent
prisoner
commonwealth
impartial
jurors
interest
affected
personal
bias
favor
either
party
pettis
warren
kirby
super
ii
right
jury
trial
however
guarantee
defendant
right
impeach
jury
verdict
juror
testimony
juror
misconduct
including
principal
species
juror
misbehaviour
notorious
partiality
blackstone
although
partiality
ground
setting
aside
jury
verdict
english
rule
time
sixth
amendment
ratified
allow
jurors
supply
evidence
misconduct
lord
mansfield
refused
receive
juror
affidavit
impeach
verdict
declaring
affidavit
ca
read
rex
almon
burr
eng
lord
mansfield
solidified
doctrine
holding
receive
affidavit
jurymen
prove
jury
cast
lots
reach
verdict
vaise
delaval
eng
time
founding
took
mixed
approaches
issue
see
cluggage
swan
binn
opinion
yeates
opinions
american
judges
greatly
differed
point
question
bishop
georgia
describing
common
law
question
transition
state
many
followed
lord
mansfield
rule
refused
receive
juror
affidavits
see
brewster
thompson
per
curiam
robbins
windover
tyl
taylor
giger
price
mcilvain
tread
tyler
stevens
swift
digest
laws
state
connecticut
england
courts
jurors
permitted
witnesses
respecting
misconduct
jury
unquestionably
correct
principle
however
permitted
juror
affidavits
juror
misconduct
see
crawford
state
cochran
street
others
initially
permitted
evidence
quickly
reversed
course
compare
smith
cheetham
cai
opinion
livingston
permitting
juror
testimony
dana
tucker
johns
per
curiam
overturning
cheetham
compare
also
bradley
lessee
bradley
dall
permitting
juror
affidavits
cluggage
supra
opinion
yeates
explaining
bradley
incorrectly
reported
rejecting
affidavits
compare
also
talmadge
northrop
root
admitting
juror
testimony
state
freeman
opinion
almost
whole
legal
world
adverse
reception
testimony
question
opinion
invincible
foundations
time
fourteenth
amendment
ratified
lord
mansfield
rule
become
firmly
entrenched
american
law
see
lettow
new
trial
verdict
law
relations
century
america
notre
dame
rev
pponents
juror
affidavits
largely
middle
century
wigmore
evidence
trials
common
law
mcnaughton
rev
wigmore
lord
mansfield
rule
came
receive
adherence
almost
unquestioned
proffatt
treatise
trial
jury
well
established
rule
law
affidavit
shall
received
juror
impeach
verdict
vast
majority
adopted
rule
matter
common
law
see
bull
commonwealth
practice
appears
generally
settled
reject
testimony
jurors
offered
impeach
verdict
cases
subject
numerous
cited
tucker
town
council
south
kingstown
collecting
cases
state
coupenhaver
mo
law
well
settled
traverse
juror
witness
prove
misbehavior
jury
regard
verdict
peck
brewer
far
back
doctrine
held
affidavits
jurors
heard
impeach
verdict
heffron
gallupe
ruling
inadmissible
depositions
jurors
transpired
jury
room
withers
fiscus
ind
seems
settled
notwithstanding
adjudications
contrary
affidavits
received
today
acknowledges
adopted
mansfield
rule
matter
common
law
ante
ascribes
significance
fact
hold
dispositive
history
establish
either
sixth
amendment
ratified
fourteenth
amendment
ratified
defendant
right
impeach
verdict
juror
testimony
juror
misconduct
fact
strongly
suggests
evidence
prohibited
absence
definitive
tradition
permitting
impeachment
juror
testimony
basis
invoke
constitutional
provision
merely
follow
established
course
common
law
trials
crimes
story
overturn
colorado
decision
preserve
rule
cf
boumediene
bush
scalia
dissenting
perhaps
good
reasons
exist
curtail
abandon
rule
done
see
appendix
majority
opinion
ante
others
ultimately
question
us
decide
left
political
process
described
justice
alito
see
post
dissenting
opinion
attempt
stimulate
thoughtful
rational
dialogue
race
relations
ante
today
ends
political
process
imposes
uniform
national
rule
constitution
require
rule
neither
respectfully
dissent
alito
dissenting
miguel
angel
petitioner
colorado
writ
certiorari
colorado
march
justice
alito
chief
justice
justice
thomas
join
dissenting
legal
system
many
rules
restrict
admission
evidence
statements
made
circumstances
confidentiality
thought
essential
statements
made
attorney
obtaining
legal
advice
statements
treating
physician
statements
made
spouse
member
clergy
familiar
examples
see
trammel
even
criminal
defendant
whose
constitutional
rights
stake
critical
need
obtain
introduce
evidence
statements
rules
stand
way
goal
avoiding
interference
confidential
communications
great
value
long
thought
justify
loss
important
evidence
effect
justice
system
loss
entails
present
case
concerns
rule
like
mentioned
namely
rule
attempting
overturn
impeach
jury
verdict
offering
statements
made
jurors
course
deliberations
centuries
judgment
experienced
judges
trial
attorneys
scholars
lawmakers
allowing
jurors
testify
trial
took
place
jury
room
undermine
system
trial
jury
integral
legal
system
juries
occupy
unique
place
justice
system
participants
trial
presiding
judge
attorneys
witnesses
function
arena
governed
strict
rules
law
every
word
recorded
may
closely
scrutinized
missteps
jurors
retire
deliberate
however
enter
space
regulated
way
jurors
ordinary
people
expected
speak
debate
argue
make
decisions
way
ordinary
people
daily
lives
constitution
places
great
value
way
thinking
speaking
deciding
jury
trial
right
protects
parties
cases
judged
special
class
trained
professionals
speak
language
ordinary
people
may
understand
appreciate
way
ordinary
people
live
lives
protect
right
door
jury
room
locked
confidentiality
jury
deliberations
closely
guarded
today
admirable
intention
providing
justice
one
criminal
defendant
pries
open
door
rules
respecting
privacy
jury
room
legal
system
done
centuries
violates
constitution
startling
development
although
tries
limit
degree
intrusion
doubtful
principled
grounds
preventing
expansion
today
holding
justifies
decision
ground
nature
confidential
communication
issue
particular
case
clear
expression
terms
racial
uniquely
harmful
criminal
justice
system
surely
correct
even
tincture
racial
bias
inflict
great
damage
system
dependent
public
trust
today
argument
finds
convincing
thought
sufficient
overcome
confidentiality
rules
like
one
issue
suppose
prosecution
witness
gives
devastating
false
testimony
defendant
suppose
witness
motivation
racial
bias
suppose
witness
admits
attorney
spouse
member
clergy
suppose
defendant
threatened
conviction
serious
crime
lengthy
term
imprisonment
seeks
compel
attorney
spouse
member
clergy
testify
witness
admissions
even
though
constitutional
rights
defendant
hang
balance
defendant
efforts
obtain
testimony
fail
provides
good
reason
result
case
rules
barring
admission
juror
testimony
impeach
verdict
rules
long
history
indeed
ratification
constitution
typically
traced
back
vaise
delaval
eng
lord
mansfield
declined
consider
affidavit
two
jurors
claimed
jury
reached
verdict
lot
see
warger
shauers
slip
lord
mansfield
approach
soon
took
root
beginning
century
earlier
firmly
established
rule
flatly
prohibited
admission
juror
testimony
impeach
jury
verdict
tanner
see
wright
gold
federal
practice
procedure
evidence
ed
wright
gold
noting
mansfield
approach
came
accepted
almost
mcdonald
pless
adopted
strict
rule
cases
federal
mcdonald
involved
allegations
jury
entered
quotient
verdict
calculated
damages
award
taking
average
jurors
suggestions
held
evidence
misconduct
used
applied
said
unquestionably
general
rule
losing
party
order
secure
new
trial
use
testimony
jurors
impeach
verdict
ibid
recognized
defendant
powerful
interest
demonstrating
jury
adopted
arbitrary
unjust
method
arriving
verdict
warned
let
established
verdicts
attacked
set
aside
testimony
took
part
publication
verdicts
many
followed
inquiry
hope
discovering
something
might
invalidate
finding
ibid
lead
harass
ment
jurors
destruction
frankness
freedom
discussion
conference
ultimately
even
though
rule
may
often
exclude
possible
evidence
misconduct
relaxing
rule
open
door
pernicious
arts
tampering
jurors
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
firm
approach
taken
mcdonald
came
known
federal
rule
approach
categorically
bars
testimony
jury
deliberations
except
offered
demonstrate
jury
subjected
extraneous
influence
example
attempt
bribe
juror
warger
supra
slip
tanner
supra
see
wright
gold
jurisdictions
notably
iowa
adopted
permissive
rule
iowa
rule
jurors
generally
permitted
testify
subject
except
subjective
intentions
thought
processes
reaching
verdict
warger
supra
slip
accordingly
iowa
rule
allowed
jurors
testify
events
conditions
might
improperly
influenced
verdict
even
took
place
deliberations
within
jury
room
wright
gold
debate
proponents
federal
rule
iowa
rule
emerged
framing
adoption
federal
rule
evidence
sides
supporters
contending
arguments
heard
considered
end
strict
federal
approach
retained
early
draft
advisory
committee
federal
rules
evidence
included
version
iowa
rule
draft
forcefully
criticized
committee
ultimately
produced
revised
draft
retained
federal
approach
tanner
supra
see
committee
rules
practice
procedure
judicial
conference
revised
draft
proposed
rules
evidence
courts
magistrates
expressly
repudiating
iowa
rule
new
draft
provided
jurors
generally
testify
matter
statement
occurring
course
jury
deliberations
ibid
new
version
approved
judicial
conference
sent
adopted
rule
referred
congress
initially
house
rejected
version
rule
instead
reverted
earlier
narrower
advisory
committee
draft
tanner
supra
see
pp
criticizing
draft
preventing
jurors
testifying
quotient
verdict
irregularities
occurred
jury
room
senate
however
judiciary
committee
favored
rule
committee
report
observed
house
draft
broke
federal
law
allowing
verdicts
challenge
basis
happened
jury
internal
deliberations
view
senate
committee
house
rule
permit
ted
harassment
former
jurors
well
possible
exploitation
disgruntled
otherwise
result
undermined
finality
verdicts
violated
common
fairness
prevented
jurors
function
ing
effectively
ibid
senate
rejected
house
version
rule
returned
rule
conference
committee
adopted
senate
version
see
conf
version
passed
houses
signed
law
president
summary
shows
process
culminated
adoption
federal
rule
evidence
epitome
reasoned
democratic
rulemaking
distinguished
members
advisory
committee
went
drafting
process
produced
two
drafts
considered
numerous
comments
persons
involved
nearly
every
area
law
rothstein
proposed
amendments
federal
rules
evidence
geo
work
committee
considered
approved
experienced
appellate
trial
judges
serving
judicial
conference
predecessors
matter
went
congress
specifically
understood
considered
rejected
version
rule
allowed
jurors
testify
juror
conduct
deliberations
tanner
judgment
participants
process
informed
assessment
empirical
issue
effect
competing
iowa
rule
jury
system
entitled
great
respect
colorado
considered
question
made
judgment
participants
federal
process
adopted
similar
rule
joined
overwhelming
majority
ante
great
majority
jurisdictions
strong
rules
continue
viewed
promoting
finality
verdicts
insulating
jury
outside
influences
warger
slip
ii
recognizing
importance
rule
twice
rebuffed
efforts
create
sixth
amendment
exception
first
tanner
two
terms
ago
warger
tanner
petitioners
convicted
committing
mail
fraud
conspiring
defraud
trial
two
jurors
came
forward
disturbing
stories
juror
misconduct
one
claimed
several
jurors
consumed
alcohol
lunch
breaks
causing
sleep
afternoons
second
added
jurors
also
smoked
marijuana
ingested
cocaine
trial
held
evidence
bacchanalia
properly
excluded
rule
noted
ubstantial
policy
considerations
support
rule
admission
jury
testimony
impeach
verdict
little
doubt
postverdict
investigation
juror
misconduct
instances
lead
invalidation
verdicts
reached
irresponsible
improper
juror
behavior
observed
clear
jury
system
survive
efforts
perfect
allowing
inquiries
seriously
disrupt
finality
process
ibid
also
undermine
full
frank
discussion
jury
room
jurors
willingness
return
unpopular
verdict
community
trust
system
relies
decisions
laypeople
tanner
petitioners
course
sixth
amendment
right
tribunal
impartial
mentally
competent
afford
hearing
quoting
jordan
massachusetts
question
however
whether
also
right
evidentiary
hearing
featuring
one
particular
kind
evidence
inadmissible
federal
rules
turning
question
noted
substantial
concerns
support
protection
jury
deliberations
intrusive
inquiry
contrast
etitioners
sixth
amendment
interests
unimpaired
jury
protected
several
aspects
trial
process
ibid
identified
four
mechanisms
protect
defendants
sixth
amendment
rights
first
jurors
examined
voir
dire
ibid
second
trial
jury
observable
counsel
personnel
ibid
third
jurors
observable
may
report
inappropriate
juror
behavior
render
verdict
ibid
fourth
trial
party
may
seek
impeach
verdict
nonjuror
evidence
misconduct
ibid
sources
protection
petitioners
right
competent
jury
convinced
juror
testimony
properly
excluded
ibid
warger
involved
negligence
suit
arising
motorcycle
crash
slip
voir
dire
individual
eventually
became
jury
foreperson
said
decide
case
fairly
impartially
slip
jury
returned
verdict
favor
defendant
one
jurors
came
forward
evidence
called
question
truthfulness
foreperson
responses
voir
dire
according
juror
foreperson
revealed
deliberations
daughter
caused
deadly
car
crash
foreperson
expressed
belief
lawsuit
ruined
daughter
life
ibid
seeking
use
testimony
overturn
jury
verdict
plaintiff
primary
contention
rule
apply
evidence
concerning
juror
alleged
misrepresentations
voir
dire
otherwise
interpreted
plaintiff
maintained
rule
threaten
right
trial
impartial
disagreed
part
claim
rule
unconstitutional
circumstances
foreclosed
decision
tanner
slip
explained
ven
jurors
lie
voir
dire
way
conceals
bias
juror
impartiality
adequately
assured
two
tanner
safeguards
reports
jurors
evidence
slip
tanner
warger
fit
neatly
broader
jurisprudence
concerning
constitutionality
evidence
rules
explained
state
federal
rulemakers
broad
latitude
constitution
establish
rules
excluding
evidence
criminal
trials
holmes
south
carolina
internal
quotation
marks
alteration
omitted
thus
evidence
rules
sort
invalidated
serve
legitimate
purpose
disproportionate
ends
asserted
promote
tanner
warger
recognized
rule
serves
vital
purposes
impose
disproportionate
burden
jury
trial
right
today
first
time
creates
constitutional
exception
rules
specifically
holds
rules
violate
sixth
amendment
extent
preclude
courts
considering
evidence
juror
racially
biased
comments
ante
attempts
distinguish
tanner
warger
efforts
fail
tanner
warger
rested
two
basic
propositions
first
rules
advance
crucial
interests
second
right
trial
impartial
jury
adequately
protected
mechanisms
use
juror
testimony
regarding
jury
deliberations
first
propositions
applies
regardless
nature
juror
misconduct
argue
otherwise
instead
contends
cases
involving
racially
biased
jurors
tanner
safeguards
less
effective
defendant
sixth
amendment
interests
profound
neither
argument
persuasive
noted
tanner
identified
four
aspects
trial
process
protect
defendant
sixth
amendment
rights
voir
dire
observation
counsel
personnel
reports
jurors
evidence
although
insists
mechanisms
may
compromised
cases
involving
allegations
racial
bias
addresses
two
fails
make
sustained
argument
either
ante
first
contends
effectiveness
voir
dire
questionable
cases
involving
racial
bias
pointed
questioning
racial
attitudes
may
highlight
racial
issues
thereby
exacerbate
prejudice
ibid
far
clear
however
careful
voir
dire
surmount
problem
lawyers
may
use
questionnaires
individual
questioning
prospective
order
elicit
frank
answers
juror
might
reluctant
voice
presence
prospective
moreover
practice
guides
replete
advice
conducting
effective
voir
dire
subject
race
outline
variety
subtle
nuanced
approaches
avoid
pointed
course
attorney
concerned
juror
concealing
bias
peremptory
strike
may
suggestion
voir
dire
ineffective
unearthing
bias
runs
counter
decisions
holding
voir
dire
subject
race
constitutionally
required
cases
mandated
matter
federal
supervisory
authority
others
typically
advisable
case
defendant
requests
see
turner
murray
plurality
opinion
ristaino
ross
voir
dire
useful
identifying
racial
prejudice
decisions
pointless
cf
turner
supra
plurality
opinion
noting
ease
risk
racial
bias
minimized
voir
dire
even
majority
recognizes
advantages
careful
voir
dire
proces
designed
prevent
racial
bias
jury
deliberations
ante
reported
decisions
substantiate
voir
dire
effective
regard
brewer
marshall
hasting
people
harlan
see
brief
respondent
listing
additional
cases
thus
voir
dire
magic
cure
good
reasons
think
valuable
tool
event
critical
point
present
purposes
effectiveness
voir
dire
debatable
empirical
proposition
assessment
addressed
process
developing
federal
state
evidence
rules
federal
state
rulemakers
try
variety
approaches
make
changes
response
insights
provided
experience
research
approach
taken
today
majority
imposing
federal
constitutional
rule
entire
country
prevents
experimentation
makes
change
exceedingly
majority
also
argues
even
cursorily
racial
bias
may
make
difficult
juror
report
inappropriate
statements
course
juror
deliberations
ante
told
difficult
call
another
juror
bigot
ibid
since
decision
mandates
admission
testimony
one
juror
statement
made
another
juror
deliberations
must
mean
making
argument
jurors
less
willing
report
biased
comments
fellow
jurors
prior
beginning
deliberations
still
sitting
biased
juror
verdict
announced
jurors
gone
home
also
questionable
empirical
assessment
judgment
better
responsibility
drafting
adopting
federal
state
evidence
rules
question
jurors
report
biased
comments
made
fellow
jurors
prior
beginning
deliberations
see
mcclinton
heller
tavares
holbrook
breyer
see
brief
respondent
brief
amicus
curiae
marshals
evidence
reporting
rarer
variety
even
something
distinction
makes
reporting
debatable
whether
difference
significant
enough
merit
different
treatment
especially
reporting
disruptive
may
result
extraneous
influences
juror
initially
minority
ultimately
persuaded
jurors
may
second
thoughts
verdict
announced
may
angry
others
panel
pressed
unanimity
addition
verdict
unpopular
particular
juror
family
friends
employer
neighbors
juror
may
regret
vote
may
feel
pressured
rectify
jury
done
short
provides
good
reason
depart
calculus
made
tanner
warger
indeed
majority
uses
hedged
language
appears
recognize
pragmatic
argument
something
makeweight
ante
noting
argument
dispositive
ante
stating
operation
safeguards
may
compromised
may
prove
insufficient
iii
real
thrust
majority
opinion
constitution
less
tolerant
racial
bias
forms
juror
misconduct
hard
square
argument
nature
sixth
amendment
right
petitioner
argument
holding
based
sixth
amendment
protects
right
impartial
jury
nothing
text
history
amendment
inherent
nature
jury
trial
right
suggests
extent
protection
provided
amendment
depends
nature
jury
partiality
bias
colorado
aptly
put
hard
discern
dividing
line
different
types
juror
bias
misconduct
whereby
one
form
partiality
implicate
party
sixth
amendment
right
another
found
decision
suggesting
sixth
amendment
recognizes
sort
hierarchy
partiality
bias
points
line
cases
holding
narrow
circumstances
constitution
requires
trial
courts
conduct
voir
dire
subject
race
decisions
however
based
ranking
types
partiality
conclusion
certain
cases
racial
bias
especially
likely
see
turner
plurality
opinion
requiring
voir
dire
subject
race
particularly
compelling
need
inquire
racial
prejudice
qualitatively
higher
risk
racial
bias
ristaino
explaining
requirement
applies
constitutionally
significant
likelihood
absent
questioning
racial
prejudice
jurors
impartial
thus
line
cases
advance
majority
argument
undoubtedly
true
racial
bias
implicates
unique
historical
constitutional
institutional
concerns
ante
hard
see
scope
individual
criminal
defendant
sixth
amendment
right
judged
impartially
efforts
reconcile
decision
mcdonald
tanner
warger
illustrate
problem
writes
misconduct
cases
troubling
unacceptable
anomalous
ante
contrast
racial
bias
says
familiar
recurring
evil
causes
systemic
injury
administration
justice
ante
imagine
two
cellmates
serving
lengthy
prison
terms
convicted
homicides
committed
unrelated
barroom
fights
trial
first
prisoner
juror
deliberations
expressed
animosity
toward
defendant
race
trial
second
prisoner
juror
deliberations
expressed
animosity
toward
defendant
wearing
jersey
hated
football
team
cases
jurors
come
forward
trial
reveal
biased
juror
said
jury
room
say
first
prisoner
entitled
introduce
jurors
testimony
racial
bias
damaging
society
second
say
even
impartial
jury
must
stay
prison
sports
rivalries
major
societal
issue
disparate
treatment
unsupportable
sixth
amendment
sixth
amendment
requires
admission
juror
testimony
statements
conduct
deliberations
show
one
type
juror
partiality
statements
conduct
showing
type
partiality
treated
way
recasting
equal
protection
case
provide
ground
limiting
holding
cases
involving
racial
bias
minimum
cases
involving
bias
based
suspect
classification
national
merit
equal
treatment
think
bias
based
sex
virginia
exercise
first
amendment
right
freedom
expression
association
see
regan
taxation
representation
washington
indeed
convicting
defendant
basis
irrational
classification
violate
equal
protection
clause
attempting
limit
damage
worked
decision
says
clear
expressions
bias
must
admitted
ante
judging
whether
statement
sufficiently
clear
often
easy
suppose
allegedly
biased
juror
case
never
made
reference
race
national
origin
said
lot
experience
macho
type
knew
men
kind
felt
get
way
women
suppose
jurors
testified
certain
macho
type
meant
refer
mexican
hispanic
men
many
similarly
suggestive
statements
easily
imagined
today
decision
difficult
judges
discern
dividing
line
clear
ly
based
racial
ethnic
bias
least
somewhat
ambiguous
iv
today
decision
especially
expanded
ways
seem
likely
invite
harms
rules
designed
prevent
first
explained
tanner
postverdict
scrutiny
juror
conduct
inhibit
full
frank
discussion
jury
room
see
also
mcdonald
warning
use
juror
testimony
misconduct
deliberations
make
intended
private
deliberation
constant
subject
public
investigation
destruction
frankness
freedom
discussion
conference
senate
report
put
ommon
fairness
requires
absolute
privacy
preserved
jurors
engage
full
free
debate
necessary
attainment
verdicts
jurors
able
function
effectively
deliberations
scrutinized
litigation
today
ruling
also
prompt
losing
parties
friends
supporters
attorneys
contact
seek
question
jurors
pestering
may
erode
citizens
willingness
serve
juries
many
jurisdictions
rules
prohibit
restrict
contact
jurors
whether
rules
survive
today
decision
open
question
effect
decision
privilege
rules
noted
outset
approaches
permitted
occur
almost
certain
increase
harassment
outright
coercion
see
mcdonald
supra
explaining
laxer
rule
permit
harassment
former
jurors
losing
parties
well
possible
exploitation
disgruntled
otherwise
one
treatise
explains
juror
reluctantly
joined
verdict
likely
sympathetic
overtures
loser
persuadable
view
consent
rested
false
impermissible
considerations
truth
hard
know
mueller
kirkpatrick
federal
evidence
ed
majority
approach
also
undermine
finality
verdicts
public
policy
requires
finality
litigation
accusations
juror
bias
may
raised
first
time
days
weeks
months
verdict
seriously
disrupt
finality
process
tanner
supra
threatens
degrad
prominence
trial
send
message
juror
misconduct
need
dealt
promptly
engle
isaac
see
conf
conferees
believe
jurors
encouraged
conscientious
promptly
reporting
misconduct
occurs
jury
deliberations
acknowledges
strict
rules
promot
full
vigorous
discussion
protect
jurors
ing
harassed
annoyed
litigants
seeking
challenge
verdict
giv
stability
finality
verdicts
ante
majority
logic
imposing
exceptions
rules
tend
defeat
full
vigorous
discussion
expose
jurors
harassment
deprive
verdicts
stability
response
jurisdictions
already
make
exception
racial
bias
detects
signs
loss
juror
willingness
engage
searching
candid
deliberations
ante
one
wonders
sort
outward
signs
expect
see
jurors
jurisdictions
speak
freely
jury
room
counterparts
jurisdictions
strict
rules
gathering
assessing
evidence
regarding
quality
jury
deliberations
different
jurisdictions
daunting
enterprise
offers
indication
anybody
undertaken
task
short
majority
barely
bothers
engage
policy
issues
implicated
rules
even
carefully
grappled
issues
still
basis
exalting
judgment
many
expert
policymakers
endorsed
broad
rules
decision
seeks
remedy
flaw
jury
trial
system
said
years
ago
questionable
whether
system
trial
jury
endure
attempt
perfect
tanner
respectfully
dissent
footnotes
prior
appears
juror
affidavits
sometimes
received
impeach
verdict
ground
juror
misbehavior
although
great
caution
mcdonald
pless
see
dent
hundred
hertford
salk
eng
philips
fowler
barnes
eng
previous
revolution
least
early
doctrine
england
distinctly
ruled
way
stood
ever
since
waterman
treatise
principles
law
equity
govern
courts
granting
new
trials
cases
civil
criminal
although
two
declined
follow
rule
century
see
wright
illinois
miss
tel
iowa
perry
bailey
state
courts
already
committed
upon
subject
wigmore
footnotes
bias
issue
case
bias
mexican
men
app
might
described
bias
based
national
origin
ethnicity
cf
hernandez
new
york
plurality
opinion
hernandez
texas
however
party
suggested
distinctions
make
substantive
difference
case
explained
extraneous
influence
exception
es
detract
rather
harmonize
weighty
government
interest
insulating
jury
deliberative
process
tanner
extraneous
influence
exception
like
rule
directed
protecting
jury
deliberations
unwarranted
interference
ibid
particular
justice
department
observed
trong
policy
considerations
continue
support
federal
approach
ecent
experience
shown
danger
harassment
jurors
unsuccessful
litigants
warrants
rule
imposes
strict
limitations
instances
jurors
may
questioned
verdict
letter
kliendienst
deputy
attorney
general
judge
maris
cong
rec
senator
mcclellan
influential
member
senate
judiciary
committee
insisted
mischief
rule
plain
see
impossible
conduct
trials
particularly
criminal
prosecutions
know
today
every
verdict
followed
hearing
conduct
juror
deliberations
letter
mcclellan
judge
maris
although
warger
civil
case
wrote
constitution
guarantees
criminal
civil
litigants
right
impartial
jury
slip
majority
opinion
case
identifies
fifth
mechanism
jury
instructions
observes
explaining
jurors
responsibilities
appropriate
jury
instructions
promote
robing
thoughtful
deliberation
turn
improves
likelihood
jurors
confront
flawed
nature
reasoning
prompted
influenced
improper
biases
ante
mechanism
like
listed
tanner
help
prevent
bias
infecting
verdict
techniques
used
case
purposes
app
tr
morning
session
see
people
harlan
trial
took
precautions
outset
trial
foreclose
injection
improper
racial
considerations
including
questions
concerning
racial
issues
jury
questionnaire
brewer
marshall
judge
asked
juror
presence
jurors
whether
bias
prejudice
black
persons
persons
hispanic
origin
lafave
israel
king
kerr
criminal
procedure
ed
noting
udges
commonly
allow
jurors
approach
bench
discuss
sensitive
matters
also
free
conduct
chambers
discussions
see
gobert
kreitzberg
rose
jury
selection
law
art
science
selecting
jury
pp
ed
explaining
issue
approached
indirectly
suggesting
use
questions
subjects
like
composition
neighborhood
juror
lives
juror
relationship
neighbors
different
races
juror
past
experiences
persons
races
jordan
jury
selection
explaining
whole
matter
prejudice
approached
delicately
cautiously
giving
example
indirect
question
avoids
word
prejudice
wenke
art
selecting
jury
discussing
questions
identify
biased
jurors
client
member
minority
group
suggesting
instead
asking
juror
attorney
inquire
national
jury
project
jurywork
systematic
techniques
krauss
ed
listing
sample
questions
racial
prejudice
grine
coward
raising
issues
race
north
carolina
criminal
cases
suggesting
attorneys
share
brief
example
judgment
shaped
racial
stereotype
make
easier
jurors
share
biased
views
http
last
visited
mar
suggesting
additional
strategies
providing
sample
questions
mauet
trial
techniques
ed
suggesting
likely
beliefs
attitudes
accurately
learned
indirection
lieberman
sales
scientific
jury
selection
discussing
research
suggesting
participants
likely
admit
unable
abide
legal
due
process
guarantees
asked
questions
direct
responses
extent
race
become
salient
voir
dire
social
science
research
suggesting
may
actually
combat
rather
reinforce
jurors
biases
see
lee
new
approach
voir
dire
racial
bias
irvine
rev
wealth
fairly
recent
empirical
research
shown
race
made
salient
either
pretrial
publicity
voir
dire
questioning
prospective
jurors
opening
closing
arguments
witness
testimony
white
jurors
likely
treat
similarly
situated
black
white
defendants
way
see
also
sommers
ellsworth
white
juror
bias
investigation
prejudice
black
defendants
american
courtroom
psychology
pub
sommers
ellsworth
much
really
know
race
juries
review
social
science
theory
research
rev
schuller
kazoleas
kawakami
impact
prejudice
screening
procedures
racial
bias
courtroom
law
human
behavior
cohn
bucolo
pride
somers
reducing
white
juror
bias
role
race
salience
racial
attitudes
applied
soc
psychology
worth
noting
even
voir
dire
entirely
ineffective
detecting
racial
bias
proposition
one
defends
still
suffice
distinguish
case
warger
shauers
allegation
warger
foreperson
entirely
circumvented
voir
dire
lying
order
shield
bias
nevertheless
concluded
even
jurors
lie
voir
dire
way
conceals
bias
juror
impartiality
adequately
assured
means
slip
majority
reliance
warger
ante
unavailing
noted
cases
juror
bias
might
extreme
prompt
consider
whether
usual
safeguards
sufficient
protect
integrity
process
slip
emphasis
added
considering
question
different
adopting
constitutionally
based
exception
rules
addition
cases
involve
challenge
evidence
rule
offer
little
guidance
performing
analysis
required
case
see
cleburne
cleburne
living
center
see
armstrong
burlington
northern
ford
new
orleans
dukes
per
curiam
majority
emphasis
unique
harms
racial
bias
succeed
cabining
novel
exception
rules
may
succeed
putting
kinds
rules
threat
example
majority
approvingly
refers
widespread
rules
limiting
attorneys
contact
jurors
ante
reasoning
majority
opinion
clear
rules
enforced
come
conflict
defendant
attempt
introduce
evidence
racial
bias
instance
happen
lawyer
obtains
clear
evidence
racist
statements
contacting
jurors
violation
local
rule
something
similar
happened
tanner
remains
seen
whether
rules
type
rules
exclude
probative
evidence
evidentiary
privileges
allowed
stand
way
imperative
purge
racial
prejudice
administration
justice
ante