Chapter 3 - § 3.10 EFFECT OF IMPANELMENT



➢ Extended Trials. Before a jury is impaneled, the judge shall inform the jurors if the trial is expected to last more than three days and may excuse a juror from performing jury service if the expected length of the trial will create a hardship or inconvenience. C.R.S. § 13-71-121.
➢ Discharge of Impaneled Juror. After a hearing, the court may excuse and discharge an impaneled juror prior to jury deliberation upon a finding of extreme hardship, and such discharge shall not be grounds for objection or mistrial as long as the statutorily required number of jurors remain able to proceed with the trial and deliberation. C.R.S. § 13-71-119(3). The decision to excuse a juror will not be disturbed absent a gross abuse of discretion. People v. Christopher, 896 P.2d 876 (Colo. 1995).

➢ Discharge of Juror Who is Participating in Deliberations. After a hearing, the court may excuse and discharge a juror participating in jury deliberations only upon a finding of an emergency or a compelling reason. C.R.S. § 13-71-119(3).

➢ Discharge of Absent Juror. The court may discharge an impaneled juror who has not appeared for jury service upon a finding that there is a strong likelihood that an unreasonable delay in the trial would occur if the court were to wait for the juror to appear. C.R.S. § 13-71-119(3).

➢ Meal Expense. If any expenses are incurred in furnishing meals or other provisions to jurors impaneled to try a case, such expenses shall be "taxed" as a cost against the unsuccessful party. C.R.S. § 13-71-145.

➢ Waiver of Objection to a Particular Juror. A party waives the right to challenge a juror if that party fails to object to that juror. As such, a trial court validly denied a request for a mistrial once the court learned that one juror had travel plans that potentially interfered with his duties as a juror, and another juror had a sister-in-law suffering from terminal cancer in a case involving medical malpractice. Freedman v. Kaiser Found. Health Plan, 849 P.2d 811, 814 (Colo. App. 1992).

➢ Occurrence of Potential Prejudice During Trial. During the course of trial for an automobile accident case, one of the empaneled jurors was involved in a one-car rollover accident. It was not improper to retain the juror upon a finding by that court that she was able and willing to remain uninfluenced by the experience and to render her decision on the evidence presented and instructions given. Wilson v. O'Reilly, 867 P.2d 92,

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT