Summary
The Montana Supreme Court affirmed Robert Allan Sweet’s conviction for DUI per se. The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by giving a modified Allen, or “Norquay,” instruction to a jury that reported it could not reach a unanimous verdict after approximately two and a half to three hours of deliberation.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court abused its discretion by giving a Norquay instruction to a jury that reported it could not reach a unanimous verdict.
- Whether the district court gave the Norquay instruction too soon, after the jury had deliberated for approximately two and one-half to three hours.
Holdings
- The Norquay instruction given to the jury was not coercive because it did not direct minority jurors to reconsider their views in light of the majority, pressure the jury to reach a unanimous verdict, single out a dissenting juror, or require the jury to deliberate until it reached a verdict.
- The district court did not abuse its discretion by giving the Norquay instruction at that time.
Key quotations
“A jury instruction is coercive if it directs the minority of jurors to reconsider their views in light of the majority, instructs the jurors that they have to reach a decision, or pressures the jurors into returning a unanimous verdict.” (429 P.3d at 915)
“Thus, we conclude the District Court did not abuse its discretion in the timing of its giving of the Norquay instruction.” (429 P.3d at 916)
“As such, the instruction should be given sparingly when the record demonstrates that hope at reaching a verdict is not yet lost and that an encouragement and reminder may help the jury resolve the case.” (429 P.3d at 917)
Factual background
Near midnight, a Billings police officer found Sweet passed out in the driver's seat of a running vehicle in a gravel area alongside Central Avenue. Sweet exhibited signs of excessive alcohol consumption and later registered a .250 blood-alcohol level. At trial, he did not contest that his alcohol concentration exceeded the legal limit or that he controlled the vehicle; his defense focused on whether the gravel area was a way of the state open to the public. After approximately two and one-half to three hours of deliberation, the jury reported that it could not reach a unanimous decision.
Procedural history
Sweet was charged in the Thirteenth Judicial District Court, Yellowstone County, with operating a noncommercial vehicle with an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more. After the jury indicated that it was deadlocked, the district court gave the Norquay instruction; the jury then returned a unanimous guilty verdict. Sweet was sentenced as a felony DUI offender based on five prior DUI convictions and appealed.