Opinion ID: 1854995
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 26

Heading: State v. Hunt Jury

Text: The Hunt trial took place in Chadron in 1995 and involved a felony criminal charge. After the jury had returned its verdict, the jurors were invited to stay and ask any questions they had regarding the trial. All jurors remained, and a question and answer session began with the jurors seated in the jury box and respondent in front of the box. Dorothy Hunter was a juror and former client of respondent when he was a practicing attorney. Hunter noted, during the question and answer session, that respondent had changed since the last time they had met. According to respondent, he told the jurors they did not want to talk about his change, but they said they wanted to know the reason. At that point, respondent went back to his chambers and returned with 3-by 5-inch pamphlets, containing 21 chapters of the New Testament Book of John. Mary Willnerd, another juror, testified that respondent handed the pamphlets to the first person in the jury box, and the pamphlets were passed down the line. Some jurors, including Willnerd, did not take a pamphlet. Once the pamphlets were distributed, respondent proceeded to tell the jury how he had become a Christian. Both Hunter and Willnerd agreed that the jurors were free to leave at any time and that no one was rebuked for failing to take a pamphlet. Hunter testified that she was not offended by respondent's remarks, while Willnerd stated that she was uncomfortable when respondent handed out the pamphlets. Sometime after this exchange took place, respondent told Motsick about his distributing religious materials to the Hunt jury and that he had a chance to witness to two of the jurors. An attorney and close friend of respondent who belongs to the same church affiliation as respondent testified that the term witness means telling others what you think the Bible teaches and why you believe it and entails an invitation to come and get a better understanding of what the [B]ible does say. Frye also testified that respondent told her that he had got to minister to the jury. Respondent agrees the incident took place but argues that he was not attempting to force his religious beliefs on any juror and that he was simply answering a question asked of him. The master found the incident took place in violation of Canons 1, 2, and 2(A) of the Code of Judicial Conduct and § 24-722(6), concluding that a judge in authority in his courtroom should not present specific forms of religious beliefs and that [r]espondent's actions were an effort to proselytize Dorothy Hunter and the other jurors.