Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1109 — NE Code / Chapter 25 / Section 25-1109
View Statute 25-1109
Status: in_force

When the case is finally submitted to the jury, they may decide in court or retire for deliberation. If they retire, they must be kept together in some convenient place, under the charge of an officer, until they agree upon a verdict, or are discharged by the court, subject to the discretion of the court to permit them to separate temporarily at night and at their meals. The officer having them under his charge shall not suffer any communication to be made to them, or make any himself, except to ask them if they have agreed upon their verdict, unless by order of the court, and he shall not, before the verdict is rendered, communicate to any person the state of their deliberations or the verdict agreed upon.

R.S.1867, Code § 285, p. 442;

R.S.1913, § 7848;

C.S.1922, § 8792;

C.S.1929, § 20-1109;

R.S.1943, § 25-1109.

Where bailiff in charge of jury learned that certain juror was voting for acquittal and thereupon went into jury room and by his attitude and statements influenced juror, a new trial was required. Bramlett v. State, 129 Neb. 180, 261 N.W. 166 (1935).

Where bailiff in charge of jury learned that certain juror was voting for acquittal and thereupon went into jury room and by his attitude and statements influenced juror, a new trial was required. Bramlett v. State, 129 Neb. 180, 261 N.W. 166 (1935).

Allowing jury to separate temporarily during the night is a salutary provision for comfort of jury and permissible at discretion of trial judge. Wiegand v. Lincoln Traction Co., 123 Neb. 766, 244 N.W. 298 (1932).

Allowing jury to separate temporarily during the night is a salutary provision for comfort of jury and permissible at discretion of trial judge. Wiegand v. Lincoln Traction Co., 123 Neb. 766, 244 N.W. 298 (1932).

Fact that there were law reports, with markers therein at cases similar to the case in trial, in jury room, was not error in absence of showing that some juror read them. In re Estate of Wilson, 114 Neb. 593, 208 N.W. 961 (1926).

Fact that there were law reports, with markers therein at cases similar to the case in trial, in jury room, was not error in absence of showing that some juror read them. In re Estate of Wilson, 114 Neb. 593, 208 N.W. 961 (1926).

It is duty of jury to follow instructions given by court. Union State Bank v. Hutton, 62 Neb. 664, 87 N.W. 533 (1901); Barton v. Shull, 62 Neb. 570, 87 N.W. 322 (1901).

It is duty of jury to follow instructions given by court. Union State Bank v. Hutton, 62 Neb. 664, 87 N.W. 533 (1901); Barton v. Shull, 62 Neb. 570, 87 N.W. 322 (1901).

It was error for juror to state to fellow jurors facts within his own knowledge. Ewing v. Hoffine, 55 Neb. 131, 75 N.W. 537 (1898).

It was error for juror to state to fellow jurors facts within his own knowledge. Ewing v. Hoffine, 55 Neb. 131, 75 N.W. 537 (1898).

It is not reversible error to leave jury in charge of deputy sheriff not specially sworn for that purpose. Deranlieu v. Jandt, 37 Neb. 532, 56 N.W. 299 (1893).

It is not reversible error to leave jury in charge of deputy sheriff not specially sworn for that purpose. Deranlieu v. Jandt, 37 Neb. 532, 56 N.W. 299 (1893).