Opinion ID: 1405837
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 12

Heading: Postverdict remarks by trial judge.

Text: After the verdict was entered, the court released the jurors from the admonition of silence, stating several times that it was henceforth not improper to speak with anyone they wished about the trial, and that this decision was up to you. I'm sure, from experience, said the court, that the attorneys would like to talk to you about the case. The court also stated that jurors often said later they did not want to talk, felt put-upon by such requests, and wondered whether it was proper to refuse. You don't have to [talk]. You may keep your thoughts to yourself. You may refuse to talk to anybody.... Indeed, said the court, I personally have great beliefs in the sanctity of the jury room and I feel that it is sometimes unnecessary for jurors to have to express views or opinions or to be asked to  for their feelings about the case, so I will leave it up to you to determine whether or not you want to talk to anybody about the case. (34) Defendant objected to these remarks and renews his contention that they improperly discouraged jurors from cooperating with defense investigators gathering evidence for posttrial motions. But there was nothing inaccurate or imbalanced in the court's statement of the applicable law. The court's expression of personal opinion was carefully disclosed as such, and the jurors were repeatedly told it was entirely proper to communicate with the defense if they wished. We see no impropriety in the court's comments.