Court Opinion

ID: 9459298
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 21:16:40.932697+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:36:06.701182
License: Public Domain

ALDISERT, Circuit Judge
(dissenting).
I am in essential agreement with the court’s analysis of appellant’s contentions except for the allegation of prejudicial error emanating from the trial court’s in camera colloquy with the jury foreman. I am not satisfied that adequate safeguards inhered in that proceeding to insure that appellant received a unanimous jury verdict based solely upon the law and the evidence presented in the courtroom.
I find two serious deficiencies in the brief discussion that transpired in the judge’s chambers.1 First, I am not satisfied that the juror ever retreated from the doubt he expressed about his inability to return an impartial verdict. When the juror confessed concern as to whether his familiarity with the character witness “would affect [his] thinking,” stating, “I don’t know. I would try not to let it, but — ,” he was interrupted by the trial judge who concluded: “I am sure it would not.” When the juror persisted in expressing concern, the judge intruded again with a statement of the judge’s personal confidence in him, described by the juror as “more confidence in me than I have in myself.”
Moreover, I am unable to characterize this interview as a purely administrative *865obligation of the court. Both counsel should have been offered the opportunity to be present so they could have either addressed questions to the juror or have suggested inquiries to the court as to the juror’s ability to return a verdict in accordance with the juror’s oath.
While there may be occasions when a trial judge is privileged to communicate with the jury or a member thereof without affording counsel the opportunity to be present, I am not persuaded that it is ever appropriate during a trial where there is an expression by a juror which is equivalent to a declaration that he may be unable to return a verdict in accordance with the evidence and the law.
I would reverse and remand for a new trial.

. THE COURT: The gentleman, who is No. 1 juror, has raised his hand, and we will stand in recess in order to determine what his inquiry may be of me.
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I do not think this will take very long. You are welcome to remain in your seats or to go into the jury room.
(Recess 1:52 P.M.)
(In Room 2112:)
THE COURT: What is your question, sir?
JUROR NO. 1: Well, I have been personally acquainted with and I have had business dealings with Mr. Shoemaker [a character witness] in Downingtown for eight to ten years now.
In my company at Lukens Steel Company we have a musical organization called the Lukens Steel Band of which I am business manager and have been for approximately 16 years. We played concerts in the summer months in surrounding communities. One of them is Downingtown. The Mayor and I have dealt with this business of contracts and money, and so forth, for this amount of time.
I am just not sure when you — your are going to ask me now, would this affect my thinking? I don’t know. I would try not to let it, but—
THE COURT: I am sure it would not. I have perfect confidence in you, sir, that you will listen, as you are sworn to do, to the testimony and that you will accept the charge of the Court as controlling the reception of evidence, and I have complete confidence that you will be completely fair and impartial.
JUROR NO. 1: You have more confidence in me than I have in myself.
THE COURT: No, seriously; we are free-born Americans—
JUROR NO. 1: Yes.
THE COURT: —and I have great confidence in the jury system, and you have a duty to perform under your oath, and I have every confidence that you will fulfill it.
JUROR NO. 1: Well, other trials I have been on they wanted to know if anybody knew the witnesses, and so forth, and I—
THE COURT: You have been sworn and your instructions are to abide by the charge of the Court, and I am confident that you will do so.
JUROR NO. 1: O.K. Thank you.
THE COURT: We will return to the courtroom.
(In open court at 1:55 P.M.)
THE COURT: You may proceed, Mr. Cadmus.
MR. CADMUS: May we approach the bench a moment, Your Honor?
THE COURT: Yes.
(At side bar:)
MR. CADMUS : If Your Honor please,' I must note an objection to the Court’s conference with Juror No. 1 in the absence of counsel.
THE COURT: Very well. It is noted.
MR. CADMUS: Thank you, sir. (End at side bar.)