Opinion ID: 3065125
Heading Depth: 5
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Newspaper Clippings

Text: [2] Gholston testified at the 1997 hearing that while her husband clipped some newspaper articles to be saved for her sister, she did not personally make any clippings. The Califor13592 HAMILTON v. AYERS nia Supreme Court noted that the referee did not make a finding regarding whether Gholston actually clipped any articles during the trial, but concluded that even if such misconduct had occurred, “any presumption of prejudice is rebutted” because the “clippings contained mere neutral and evenhanded accounts of the trial.” Id. at 617 n.21. We agree. Moreover, as the California Supreme Court observed, “[n]o strong inference of bias arises simply because a juror failed to resist the temptation to read news articles,” and “[t]here is no evidence that Gholston discussed these articles with other jurors or otherwise employed them in her deliberations.” Id. Therefore, the clippings do not support a claim of implied or concealed bias.