State v. Doleszny

Summary

The Vermont Supreme Court held that permitting jurors to submit questions for witnesses, subject to judicial screening and discretion, is permissible in a criminal trial. The court concluded that the defendant failed to preserve his challenge by not renewing his objection after the preliminary jury instructions, but addressed the merits because the issue warranted guidance. The court affirmed the bribery conviction.

Holdings

1. A party must object on the record after jury instructions are given to preserve an instructional issue for appeal, and this requirement applies regardless of the stage of the proceedings at which the instructions are delivered, including preliminary instructions.
2. Vermont trial judges have authority, in their discretion, to permit jurors to submit questions for witnesses in criminal cases, provided the questions are submitted to and screened by the judge, disclosed to the parties, subject to objections and requests for narrowing or rephrasing, and ruled on by the judge on the record.
3. Permitting jurors to submit questions through the trial judge, under the procedures used here, does not inherently deprive a criminal defendant of an impartial jury, a fair trial, or due process, and does not impermissibly shift the State's burden of proof.

Questions Presented

1. Whether defendant preserved for appellate review his challenge to the preliminary jury instruction permitting juror-submitted questions by failing to object after the instruction was given.
2. Whether a Vermont trial judge may permit jurors in a criminal trial to submit questions for witnesses, subject to judicial screening and party objections.
3. Whether the juror-questioning procedure used in defendant's trial deprived him of an impartial jury, a fair trial, or due process by compromising juror neutrality or shifting the State's burden of proof.

Disposition

affirmed