Title: Lockridge v. State

State: georgia

Issuer: Georgia Supreme Court

Document:

260 Ga. 528 (1990) 397 S.E.2d 695 LOCKRIDGE v. THE STATE. S90G0716. Supreme Court of Georgia. Decided November 15, 1990. Cook & Palmour, Bobby Lee Cook, W. Benjamin Ballenger, for appellant. Dupont K. Cheney, District Attorney, J. Stephen Archer, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee. HUNT, Justice. The central issue in this granted certiorari is whether the misconduct *529 of a bailiff and juror requires a new trial notwithstanding the trial court's finding the defendant was not harmed. In Lockridge v. State, 194 Ga. App. 487 (390 SE2d 853) (1990), the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's conclusion that the prosecution carried its burden of showing that the defendant was not harmed by the bailiff's improper remark. After the jury had been chosen, the trial court admonished the jurors not to discuss the case with anyone and to report any violations of that admonishment to the court. A deputy sheriff was then assigned to take one of the jurors to her home to prepare for sequestration at a nearby hotel. The juror testified at the hearing on the motion for new trial that she told the deputy: The juror did not report this conversation to the court until after the trial. Lamons v. State, 255 Ga. 511, 512 (340 SE2d 183) (1986). While the trial court's determination of this issue is entitled to great deference, Shaw v. State, supra at pp. 101-102. The judgment of the Court of Appeals affirming the trial court is reversed. Judgment reversed. All the Justices concur.