Image 01
  • Home
  • Services
    • Legal Videographer | Video Depositions
    • National Certified Court Reporters
    • Wisconsin Court Reporters
    • Deposition Reporting
    • Certified Court Reporters
    • Conference Rooms
    • Videography
    • Video Conferencing
    • Case Management
    • – Case Management Tools
    • Nationwide Coverage
  • About
    • Principals
    • Helpful Info
    • Our Team
  • Schedule
  • Blog
  • Contact
Toll Free 800.456.9531
Blog

Your Wisconsin Deposition Headquarters

Subscribe

For monthly updates on court reporting news, sign up for our free newsletter!

 Subscribe in a reader

  • Office Hours: M-F, 7:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
    Phone: 414-224-9533

    After Hours

    414.581.1597
    414.704.5993
  • Archives

    • June 2015
    • November 2014
    • October 2014
    • September 2014
    • April 2014
    • March 2014
    • February 2014
    • January 2014
    • December 2013
    • November 2013
    • October 2013
    • September 2013
    • August 2013
    • July 2013
    • June 2013
    • May 2013
    • April 2013
    • March 2013
    • February 2013
    • January 2013
    • December 2012
    • November 2012
    • October 2012
    • September 2012
    • August 2012
    • July 2012
    • June 2012
    • May 2012
    • April 2012
    • March 2012
    • February 2012
    • January 2012
    • December 2011

Brown & Jones Court Reporting Blog

« Court reporting agencies pick up slack as state and local governments cut funding
Wisconsin Supreme Court: New evidence not enough to justify second trial for convicted robber »

Court: Presence of improperly seated juror not grounds for new trial in strangulation case

In Wisconsin, an appellate court recently affirmed the conviction of a man who had requested a new trial after learning that a member of the jury in his case had accidentally been seated in place of his like-named father.

The defendant in the case, Jacob Turner, was convicted on charges of strangulation, suffocation, battery and disorderly conduct. The day after the verdict was delivered, the circuit court realized that the “John P. Smith” who showed up for jury duty was not the same one who had been summoned.

All of the identifying information included with the summons could have applied to either man, but because the father had been called up for jury duty several years earlier, he believed that the summons was for his son.

With the same first and last names, middle initial, phone number and home address, the younger John Smith readily believed the summons was directed to him, and had no trouble checking in when he showed up at the courthouse.

Thus, the wrong individual ended up serving on a jury that was assigned to a serious case. When it learned of the mistake, the circuit court held a hearing to determine exactly what had happened and how to move forward.

Court applied ‘harmless error’ test

Both the father and son testified about the chain of events that led to the latter showing up at court instead of the former. The two men explained that they had attempted to call a phone number that was included with the summons, but only reached an automated recording, which offered them no help.

Based on the Smiths’ testimony, the court concluded that the switch had been an “honest mistake” and decided to let the verdict stand. It then notified Turner and the state prosecutor of what had happened.

The court also informed both parties that it did not intend to take any further action on the matter, although it clarified that each side retained the right to request a hearing on the subject.

Subsequently, Turner filed a motion requesting that the court set aside his conviction and arrange a new trial with a properly selected jury. After his motion was dismissed, he filed an appeal.

Turner cited the Wisconsin and U.S. Constitutions to support his argument that it violated his rights when the court held a hearing on the matter without giving him the opportunity to be present. The convict argued that if he had been given the opportunity to question the Smiths, he may have uncovered additional evidence that would support his case.

However, the appellate court ruled that Turner could not rely on “speculative or hypothetical” theories of how he had been harmed by the error to establish a need for a new trial. Judges pointed out that the defendant had been provided with a deposition transcript and declined to summon the Smiths to the hearing on his motion for a new trial.

“The fact is that ‘John P. Smith’ who lived at the address listed in the summons appeared for jury duty and never misrepresented who he was,” wrote the three-judge panel that heard the case. “The fact that the clerk’s office meant to summon a different ‘John P. Smith’ at the same address does not make the son an improper juror.”

The District II Court of Appeals affirmed Turner’s conviction, as well as the fact that “harmless” errors in the legal process do not invalidate otherwise sound outcomes. At the same time, having an accurate record of proceedings is essential in order for litigants to identify any more substantive issues that may warrant remedial action.

Certified Wisconsin court reporters can aid legal professionals by providing reliable transcription and deposition videography services.

 

This entry was posted on Sunday, February 3rd, 2013 at 1:38 am and is filed under All Posts, Wisconsin Legal. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

Leave a Reply

 
  • Brown & Jones
    735 North Water Street
    Milwaukee, WI 53202
    Tel (414) 224-9533
    Toll-Free (800) 456-9531
    Fax (414) 224-9635
  • Home
  • Services
  • About
  • Schedule
  • Blog
  • Contact

  • © 2012 All Rights Reserved.