Opinion ID: 1106169
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 18

Heading: the failure of the trial court to remove juror degeorge after her show of support for the prosecution violated mississippi law and the fourteenth amendment to the u.s. constitution

Text: The victim's daughter, Tessie Barnes, began to weep during her testimony. She was helped down from the witness stand by her father and a friend, Blake Pablovich, while the jury was still in the courtroom. When the court recessed for the day, three courtroom observers testified that juror DeGeorge made a signal with her hand to another spectator. The spectator was Blake Pablovich. The trial judge questioned the observers in chambers. Lana Triana testified that DeGeorge made a sweeping motion with her hand to another spectator, but did not actually see what was done with the hand. Betty Arnold testified that DeGeorge made an OK signal with her hand and her fingers were pointing down. Doris Cooper also testified that DeGeorge made an OK signal to Pablovich. Pablovich, however, denied seeing the signal. The trial judge denied defense counsel's motion for a mistrial: THE COURT: At this point I see no basis at all for that. If I have a conflict as to what type of gesture was made, I have an unequivocal witness that says if it was made she didn't see it and she has no connection to this case other than being over here as a friend for Tessie. You've raised the issue, so the issue to me is really, what did the juror do, and I think I ought to talk to the juror. I'll do it on the record with everybody present, or you did suggest off the record privately between me and her. MR. NECAISE: The defendant Jeffrey Ladner  let the record show that  of course it already has it, Jeffrey  that Jeffrey Ladner is here and I'm hereby asking him does he have any objection to the Court talking to that prospective juror in chambers and no one else in here but the juror and the Judge. Do you have any objection to that taking place? THE DEFENDANT: No. As stated, defense counsel suggested that the trial judge question the juror off the record and the defendant readily agreed to this arrangement. The record is unclear as to what then actually transpired. The Court further said: THE COURT: Like I say, I would prefer to wait until we break at noon and do it as casually as possible with the juror, make no big deal out of it, if it is as it appears to be, to me, no big deal. I think, frankly, what may have happened is that this girl was in the courtroom and  and I didn't see it  from what I gather she obviously was somewhat distraught over Tessie about to break down, and you know, some of the jurors may have picked up on that, and if a gesture was made maybe it was such that the juror was just trying to let that party know that, you know, she was okay. I don't know. ... . ... It's not impossible that one of the jurors could have been making a hand motion to somebody else in the audience, a friend or relative. The problem with things like this from  you see from three people here is everybody looks at things differently or sees things differently. I realize, of course, that these two women, three women who testified are here for Jeffrey Ladner and they're highly sensitive. It's apparent from the beginning of this trial that Mr. Ladner's family and friends are obviously concerned over this case and sensitive to anything that may appear to be improper. I don't think you gentlemen would disagree with that. The trial judge, during the conference in chambers, determined that the alleged conduct was of no consequence. He was of the opinion that no reversible error was committed and that no prejudice resulted to the appellant. The determination of the partiality of a juror is left to the sound discretion of the trial judge. Schwarzauer v. State, 339 So.2d 980, 982 (Miss. 1976). We are of the opinion that the lower court did not err in declining to grant a mistrial.