Opinion ID: 1129186
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Whether the Circuit Court Erred by Denying Younger's Post-trial Motions.

Text: ¶ 6. Younger also argues the circuit court erred when it refused to grant her post-trial motions for a new trial and judgment notwithstanding the verdict based on the possible misconduct of jurors. The standard of review for a post-trial motion is abuse of discretion. Horton v. State, 919 So.2d 44, 49 (Miss.2005) (quoting Howell v. State, 860 So.2d 704, 764 (Miss.2003)). During a hearing on her post-trial motions for a new trial and judgment notwithstanding the verdict, Younger called upon a private detective to testify as to the possible possession of cell phones by jurors during Younger's trial. The circuit judge refused to allow the private detective to testify and denied Younger's motions. The circuit judge's reasons for refusing to allow the detective to testify are of no consequence because Younger attempted to bring an issue on a post-trial motion that she failed to raise at the trial court level. Such attempts are barred. See Barnett v. State, 725 So.2d 797, 801-02 (Miss.1998) (In a murder case, we stated that waiting to raise issues in a post-trial motion that should have been raised at trial bars consideration of those issues.) While Younger argues she did indeed bring the possible juror misconduct to the circuit judge's attention, it was Younger's responsibility to preserve the record for appeal. See Pulphus, 782 So.2d at 1224. Because the record does not reflect Younger's attempts to raise the issue of juror misconduct at the circuit court level, we do not find that the circuit judge abused his discretion by denying Younger's post-trial motions that were based on her allegations concerning the jury. Id.