Opinion ID: 2631133
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Inquiry into Juror V.'s mental processes

Text: Defendant contends the trial court violated his rights to due process and an impartial jury under the state and federal Constitutions when, at the hearing on defendant's new trial motion, it disallowed questioning of Juror V. regarding her possible reluctance to vote for the death penalty before the juror's conversation with Cole, her employer. Here are the relevant facts: During questioning of Juror V., defendant's counsel asked her, [A]fter the conversation with Mr. Cole, did you feel better? Juror V. responded, Yes. Counsel then inquired, And that was because you were you were reluctant to be responsible for a death penalty verdict; isn't that true? The prosecutor objected to this question as contrary to Evidence Code section 1150, subdivision (a), which precludes the introduction of evidence to show the effect of [any] statement, conduct, condition, or event upon a juror either in influencing [the juror's] assent to or dissent from the verdict or concerning the mental processes by which it was determined. The trial court sustained the objection. We perceive no error. As we explained earlier, substantial evidence supports the trial court's finding that Juror V.'s conversation with Cole took place after the jury returned the death penalty verdict in this case. But even if the conversation had occurred before or during the penalty phase deliberations, we would not disturb the trial court's ruling. Evidence Code section 1150, as a matter of policy, excludes evidence of the subjective reasoning processes of jurors to impeach their verdicts. ( People v. Steele (2002) 27 Cal.4th 1230, 1264, 120 Cal.Rptr.2d 432, 47 P.3d 225.) Here, the question defendant's counsel posed to Juror V., to which the trial court sustained the prosecutor's objection, impermissibly intruded into the juror's penalty phase deliberative process by inquiring whether Cole's comment to the juror, that not all death row inmates are executed, relieved Juror V. of responsibility when voting on the death verdict.