Opinion ID: 796719
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Dismissal of Juror Moenster

Text: 45 Cannon also argues the district court erred in dismissing Juror Moenster. A district court's decision to remove or not remove a juror is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. United States v. Running Horse, 175 F.3d 635, 638 (8th Cir.1999). We will uphold the district court's decision to remove a juror if the record reflects a legitimate basis for it. United States v. Evans, 455 F.3d 823, 824 (8th Cir.2006) (discussing the standard of review for excusing a potential juror for cause); see also United States v. Green, 428 F.3d 1131, 1135 (8th Cir.2005) (applying the same standard to the district court's decision to retain a juror alleged to have been sleeping during trial). 46 We have never discussed a district court's decision to dismiss a juror because of emotional problems; however, several other circuits have held that the trial court's dismissal of a juror during trial for emotional issues is proper. See e.g., United States v. Beard, 161 F.3d 1190, 1193-95 (9th Cir.1998) (stating that just cause encompasses all kinds of problems—temporary as well as those of long duration— that may befall a juror, and holding that dismissal of a juror because of her distraught emotional state was proper) (internal marks omitted); United States v. Huntress, 956 F.2d 1309, 1312-13 (5th Cir. 1992) (upholding the dismissal of a juror during deliberations because of mental illness). We have held that illness of a juror is a legitimate reason for dismissal, United States v. McMasters, 90 F.3d 1394, 1402 (8th Cir.1996), and Ms. Moenster's condition is arguably an illness. The court here properly assessed Ms. Moenster's credibility and demeanor, and ultimately determined that justice would be better served if she was not on the jury. Because emotional issues are a legitimate basis for dismissal, the dismissal was not in error.