Opinion ID: 1548296
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Motion to Conduct Juror Voir Dire

Text: The defendant argues that the trial court erred in declining to ask his proposed questions of the jurors. Although the trial court conducted voir dire of each juror, the defendant contends that the questions were insufficient to probe the specific issue; that is, the rationale for the jury's verdict. Here, the trial court inquired of each juror: whether the jury followed the court's instructions during deliberations; whether the jury based its verdicts only upon evidence presented in court and the law provided by the judge; whether the jury agreed that the defendant was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the seven offenses for which he was convicted; whether the jury understood that any verdict must be unanimous; whether each verdict was unanimous; whether the potential punishment was a factor in deciding that the defendant was guilty of the crimes charged; and whether the jury decided beyond a reasonable doubt that it was the defendant, and not his wife, who committed the offenses for which he was convicted. The jurors' responses to this inquiry were sufficient to satisfy the court that no misconduct occurred. In light of the trial court's thorough voir dire, its decision not to further inquire into the matter by asking the defendant's proposed voir dire questions did not constitute an unsustainable exercise of discretion. See Goupil, 154 N.H. at 221, 908 A.2d 1256. Affirmed.