Summary
The Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed the denial of Jimmie Roach’s motion for post-conviction relief based on alleged extraneous information received by a juror during trial. The court held that Roach failed to make the required threshold showing of good cause to believe the jury had been exposed to extraneous prejudicial information. It also explained the procedure for investigating alleged juror misconduct and held that the trial court’s credibility determination was not clearly erroneous.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Roach established sufficient grounds for post-conviction relief based on alleged newly discovered evidence that a juror was exposed to extraneous information.
- Whether the alleged juror communication made a prima facie showing of improper external influence requiring the trial court to investigate and reconvene the jury.
- Whether the trial court violated Mississippi Rule of Evidence 606(b) by questioning Tate about whether the alleged extraneous information affected his deliberations.
Holdings
- The claim was not a true newly discovered-evidence claim because the alleged juror communication was not trial evidence and did not concern the weight or sufficiency of the evidence. The court properly addressed it as a claim concerning the trial court's handling of alleged extraneous communication with a juror.
- When a trial court learns of potential juror misconduct or improper external influence, it must first determine whether good cause exists to believe that an improper outside influence or extraneous prejudicial information occurred. If so, the court should conduct a post-trial hearing to determine whether the communication occurred and its contents; if the communication occurred, the court must determine whether it was reasonably possible that the communication altered the verdict.
- Roach failed to prove good cause to believe that the jury received extraneous prejudicial information or was improperly influenced, so the trial court was not required to open an investigation or reconvene the jury.
- The trial court erred by questioning Tate about whether the alleged extraneous information affected his deliberations or altered his verdict, because Mississippi Rule of Evidence 606(b) limits juror testimony to whether the communication occurred and what it contained. The error did not require reversal because the remaining evidence did not establish good cause for an investigation.
Key quotations
“An investigation is warranted if the trial judge finds that “good cause exists to believe that there was in fact an improper outside influence or extraneous prejudicial information.”” (at 132)
“Finally, if the investigation reveals that the communication was made, the court must determine whether it was reasonably possible that the communication altered the verdict.” (at 132)
“But questioning of a juror must be limited to whether the communication was made and what it contained.” (at 133)
Factual background
During Roach's 2004 trial, juror Derrick Tate allegedly heard law-enforcement officers say that Roach would receive five to eight years if convicted. Tate's affidavit stated that the information caused him to vote guilty, but his hearing testimony was inconsistent concerning how he learned the information, whether it influenced his verdict, and the identities of the officers. The identified officer did not corroborate the account, and Tate testified that he did not tell other jurors about the alleged conversation.
Procedural history
Roach was convicted in the Hinds County Circuit Court of possession of cocaine and possession of hydromorphone and received consecutive enhanced sentences. After direct review ultimately resulted in reinstatement and affirmance of the convictions and sentences, Roach obtained permission to seek post-conviction relief. The circuit court denied his motion, and the Court of Appeals affirmed. The Mississippi Supreme Court granted certiorari, affirmed the lower courts, and held that the evidence did not establish good cause to investigate alleged juror exposure to extraneous information.