Rocky Dietz v. Hillary Bouldin
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Concurring in the judgmentBea, Circuit Judge
I agree with the majority that the district court judge did not err in re-empaneling the jury in this case. I further agree with the majority’s conclusion that the district court judge may re-empanel a jury only if he finds that the jury was “not exposed to any outside influences that would compromise their ability to fairly reconsider the verdict.” Maj: Op. at 1100. I do not agree, however, that the district court judge should be required to undertake “an appropriate inquiry” into whether prejudicial influences have .tainted the jury. Id. Because the majority’s adoption of this duty of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- United States v. John Bagnariol, United States of America v. Gordon L. Walgren, United States of America v. Patrick GallagherCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
- United States v. BeardCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- United States v. Hagop VartanianCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. John Fife Symington, Iii, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
- McNeil v. WisconsinSupreme Court of the United States · 1991