Chapter 4 - § 4.2 • JUROR MISCONDUCT RESULTING IN NEW TRIAL

• Jurisdiction: Colorado

§ 4.2 • JUROR MISCONDUCT RESULTING IN NEW TRIAL

Colorado

➢ General. CRE 606(b) is broad in scope and precludes courts from peering beyond the veil that shrouds jury deliberations. However, the rule enumerates three narrow exceptions allowing jurors to testify about "(1) whether extraneous prejudicial information was improperly brought to the jurors' attention, (2) whether any outside influence was improperly brought to bear upon any juror, or (3) whether there was a mistake in entering the verdict onto the verdict form." CRE 606(b); Peña-Rodriguez v. People, 350 P.3d 287, 289-90 (Colo. 2015), rev'd on other grounds in Peña-Rodriguez v. Colorado, 137 S. Ct. 855 (2017).

➢ General. Courts may inquire into juror misconduct when jury deliberations have been substantially undermined because of fundamental flaws in the deliberative process. CRE 606(b), applicable to both civil and criminal cases, prohibits inquiry into the deliberative process of jurors. But a party alleging juror misconduct may introduce evidence to establish that external matters improperly influenced the jury verdict. A party may also establish by affidavit what, if any, outside extraneous information was actually received by the jury. How the improperly received information was actually used by jurors in the deliberative process cannot be inquired into, to protect the finality of jury verdicts, the sanctity of jury deliberations, and the privacy of jurors. Montrose Valley Funeral Home v. Crippin, 835 P.2d 596, 598 (Colo. App. 1992).

➢ Impeachment of Verdict; General. CRE 606(b), which bars solicitation and use of juror testimony or affidavits to address the validity of a jury verdict, applies to all civil and criminal cases. Stewart v. Rice, 47 P.3d 316, 321 (Colo. 2002).

➢ Juror Misconduct; Relief from Judgment. Where "grievous jury misconduct" raised sensitive issues of religion, it was appropriate for a trial court to apply C.R.C.P. 60(b)(5) to relieve a party from an adverse judgment. Canton Oil Corp. v. District Court, 731 P.2d 687, 694 (Colo. 1987).
➢ New Trial; General. A trial court's ruling on a motion for a new trial based on juror misconduct is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. Kendrick v. Pippin, 222 P.3d 380, 386 (Colo. App. 2009), rev'd on other grounds, 252 P.3d 1052 (Colo. 2011).

➢ New Trial; General. When confronted with a verdict that is not unanimous, the trial court has only two choices: either send the jury out for further deliberations or discharge it. Simpson v.

...