State v. Sanders
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1ConcurrenceWahl, Justice
I cannot agree with the majority opinion on the issue of jury sequestration but under the facts of this case I do not reach a different result.
The effect of the court’s ruling in this case is to change the plain meaning of Minn.R.Crim.P. 26.03, subd. 5, greatly limiting the protection of the right to a fair trial this rule affords to criminal defendants. Rule 26.03 requires criminal juries to be sequestered while they deliberate unless the defendant consents to their separation.
In this state, it is a long-standing precedent that sequestration of jurors during deliberation is necessary to…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Remmer v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- State v. BockmanCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1984
- State v. SmallsWashington Supreme Court · 1983
- State v. HollyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984
- State v. McComseySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1982
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.