Opinion ID: 1190835
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Contact Between Jurors and Witnesses

Text: Finally, Pacheco claims that the fact that one of the prosecution's witnesses gave a juror a three block ride in his car so prejudiced the determination of this case as to demand a new trial. When jury misconduct is alleged, there must be a showing of prejudice. Black v. Reynolds, 109 Idaho 277, 707 P.2d 388 (1985). Here, no testimony was presented that the juror and the witness discussed the case. In any event, when the complaining party or his counsel know of the alleged jury misconduct before the verdict is returned but keep silent, any right to claim misconduct is waived. Moore v. Adams, 273 Or. 576, 542 P.2d 490 (1975). In this case, Pacheco has failed to show prejudice and further, his counsel knew of the alleged misconduct prior to the verdict but kept silent. The trial court properly exercised its discretion in ruling that the alleged misconduct did not prejudice the trial. The verdict and judgment and post-trial orders of the trial court are in all respects affirmed. Costs to respondent, no attorney fees awarded on appeal. BAKES, C.J., and JOHNSON, J., concur. SHEPARD, J., sat but did not participate due to his untimely death.