Ernesto Roberto Ramirez v. State of Indiana
Indiana Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
RUSH, Justice.
Every accused has a constitutionally protected right to an impartial jury. We have long recognized that even one juror’s unauthorized contacts and communications may poison the entire jury, but we rely upon trial courts to decide whether a mistrial is the cure. Unfortunately, we have given trial courts inconsistent guidance on both how to make this determination and whether the accused must prove prejudice. Today we clarify our precedent: Defendants are entitled to a rebuttable presumption of prejudice when they can show by a preponderance of the evidence that an unauthorized,…
2Cases cited43 opinions
- United States v. OlanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Smith v. PhillipsSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Remmer v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- Turner v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- United States v. FarhaneCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2011
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by44 opinions
- Jeffrey A. Weisheit v. State of IndianaIndiana Supreme Court · 2015
- Gary Wayne Oswalt v. State of IndianaIndiana Supreme Court · 2014
- David Bisard v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals · 2015
- Michael Pugh v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals · 2016
- Kastin E. Slaybaugh v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals · 2015
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.