Jury Verdicts

• Jurisdiction: Maryland

VI. Jury verdicts

A. Receiving the jury's verdict

When the jury concludes its deliberations and reaches a verdict, the jury returns to the courtroom. The foreperson speaks for the jury, answering, in open court, the inquiry from the court clerk or bailiff and stating the verdict(s). Verdicts are returned in open court and on the record. Md. Rule 4-327(a). In Jones v. State, 384 Md. 669, 684-86 (2005), the Court of Appeals stated that the verdict becomes final when announced in open court. If the trial court and the parties agree, the court may accept a sealed verdict, signed by each juror, which is opened later in open court. Md. Rule 4-327(b).

The trial court almost always has the jury complete a verdict sheet and submit it to the court. See ALI-ABA Trial & Post-Trial Proceedings at 273-75. In Ogundipe, 424 Md. 58, the Court of Appeals held that a verdict sheet does not constitute a verdict but "is merely a tool used to aid the jury in reaching its verdict; it therefore does not bind the jury or the court to its contents." Id. at 72-73.

B. Confirming the jury's verdict

1. Polling the jury

A jury verdict is announced in open court by the foreperson and not by the other 11 jurors. Polling the jury is the method of confirming the verdict and ensuring that the foreperson's stated verdict is also the verdict of each juror. Polling, if requested by either side, requires the trial court to poll each juror, in open court, and for that juror to announce whether the foreperson's verdict is also that juror's verdict. Md. Rule 4-317(e).

Polling the jury is not required by the Sixth Amendment right to trial by jury but, if requested, it is required by the unanimity requirement under the Maryland Constitution. Md. Const. Decl. of Rights art. 21; Ross v. State, 24 Md. App. 246, 253 (1975), rev'd on other grounds, 276 Md. 664 (1976). A request that the jury be polled may be made at any time prior to the jury being discharged. Maloney v. State, 17 Md. App. 609, 621 (1973). If neither party requests that the jury be polled, a polling of the jury is waived.

2. Hearkening the jury

Jury hearkening is, in essence, a collective—not individual—polling of the jury. Unlike jury polling, which is controlled by both the Maryland Constitution and a court rule, jury hearkening is part of Maryland's common law. If the jury is polled, there is no requirement that the jury be hearkened, even if requested. Jones v. State, 173 Md. App. 430, 458 (2007). If the verdict is hearkened, there is no requirement for jury polling, unless jury polling is requested. If there is neither jury polling, nor jury hearkening, the verdict is defective and a new trial is required. Hearkening, like polling, must take place before the jury is discharged.

3. Effect of the failure to poll the jury, if requested and/or the failure to hearken the jury

If requested by either side, polling of the jury must be conducted as a predicate for the jury verdict to become final and valid. Md. Rule 4-327(e). In State v. Santiago, 412 Md. 28, 31-32 (2009), the Court of Appeals held that, without the jury being polled, if requested, or hearkened in the alternative, the jury verdict is a nullity. If there is a request for the jury to be polled, polling the jury is required, even if the jury has been hearkened. In the absence of a demand for the jury to be poll, a hearkening of the verdict is required for proper recordation of the verdict.

Thus, there must be either polling or hearkening and, if polling is requested, there must be polling. Jones, 173 Md. App. at 458. In Givens v. State, 76 Md. 485 (1893), the Court of Appeals stated that the purpose of hearkening is to secure certainty and accuracy in the jury verdict and to correct any mistake.

4. When polling or hearkening result in a unanimous verdict

In Hoffert v. State, 319 Md. 377, 386 (1990), the Court of Appeals held that, if the jury confirms that its verdict is unanimous, through polling, if requested, or through hearkening, the case is no longer in the province of the jury, and the verdict is final.

5. When polling or hearkening results in a non-unanimous verdict

If polling or hearkening the jury results in a non-unanimous jury, the trial court may (a) instruct the jury to continue deliberating; or (b) declare a mistrial and discharge the jury. In Biggs v. State, 56 Md. App. 638, 650-53 (1983), the Court of Special Appeals stated that a juror's attempt to ask a question did not indicate that the jury was not unanimous or was equivocal about the verdict.

6. When polling or hearkening results in an ambiguous juror verdict

In Lattisaw v. State, 329 Md. 339, 347-48 (1993), the Court of Appeals held that if a juror's response is ambiguous or raises a question as to whether the jury's verdict is...