Opinion ID: 1788754
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Night-time Express

Text: After ten full days of trial, the verdict was rendered at 10:45 at night on Memorial Day, when, according to the trial court itself, the jury was worn-out. Vol. XXV, 2048. In Isom v. State, 481 So.2d 820 (Miss. 1985), this Court reversed a jury verdict where the jury deliberated from 3:21 p.m. until 10:38 p.m. following a one and a half day trial. This Court stated: The physical and mental stamina of the jury in particular, and the Court in addition, was taxed. Although judicial time and economy are of importance, the endurance of a jury requires consideration. This court suggests that this is excessive deliberation time. (Emphasis added.) Id. at 824. See also Grimsley v. Tyner, 454 So.2d 482, 485 (Miss. 1984) (requiring or permitting juries to deliberate on cases during such times may cause their verdicts to become suspect ) (emphasis added); Parker v. State, 454 So.2d 910, 912 (Miss. 1984) (due process requires reasonable hours and circumstances); Edge v. State, 393 So.2d 1337 (Miss. 1981). Here the jury was pressured under more extreme conditions. After saturation with complex facts and exhibits for ten days, on the final day, the Memorial Day holiday, the jury heard testimony from 9:00 in the morning until approximately 5:30 p.m., followed by extensive instructions and two hours' worth of closing arguments. This would have been a feat of endurance for a jury on any day. It was even more arduous because the jurors were being kept away from their families on Memorial Day, in a court house that was not air conditioned most of the afternoon. Vol. XXIV, 1981-82. Then, at 8:15 that night, eleven and three quarters hours after beginning the tenth day of trial, the jury was sent to the jury room to eat a meal and begin deliberations! The jury had to consider numerous photographs, exhibits, and instructions and make an informed decision before the next morning. At 10:45 that night, the jury returned verdicts totaling $7,150,000. There was no reason for the jury to make such an important decision under these conditions. Vol. XXIV, 2049. The jurors should have been allowed to go home at 5:30 p.m., after all testimony was complete, and return Tuesday morning for jury instructions, closing arguments and deliberation. They would have been refreshed, more willing and better able to consider all the issues and evidence. This is exactly what the defendants' attorneys suggested. Vol. XXIV, 1981. The trial court simply refused to listen. A verdict an hour and fifteen minutes before midnight, fourteen hours into the tenth day of a complex trial in an un-air conditioned court house on Memorial Day, is clearly suspect. Judicial time and economy do not warrant forcing a jury to make an important decision that way. Putting this case to the jury under these circumstances was reversible error, regardless of the verdict.