366 P.3d 536
Alaska Ct. App.2016Background
- Leta G. Allen was charged with driving under the influence after a trooper testified she swerved and later showed impairment; toxicology detected THC, diazepam, and trazodone but no alcohol.
- At trial the trooper conceded photographs of the highway did not show a fog line he had testified about; defense emphasized this in closing.
- Jury began deliberations and reported a 3–3 deadlock; a Fields instruction was planned to urge further deliberation.
- A private juror note alleged the jury foreman had driven to the highway segment, observed there was no fog line, and told the other jurors, introducing extraneous evidence.
- The judge individually questioned all six jurors; responses split (four denying extraneous investigation, two affirming the foreman personally investigated and reported back).
- The judge declared a mistrial over the defense’s objection, concluding there was no probability of a unanimous verdict; the State seeks to retry Allen and she invoked double jeopardy.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether mistrial was manifestly necessary so retrial does not violate double jeopardy | State: juror misconduct (foreman’s independent investigation) threatened jury integrity and required mistrial | Allen: no manifest necessity; judge should have continued or cured without declaring mistrial | Court: mistrial was manifestly necessary because conflicting juror accounts meant further inquiry would irreparably undermine jury’s ability to deliberate fairly; retrial permitted |
| Whether the trial judge’s individual voir dire of jurors about possible extraneous information was permissible | State: judge must investigate potential extraneous prejudicial information during deliberations | Allen: (implicit) concerns about improper inquiry or alternative remedies | Court: inquiry was proper and necessary; Alaska Evid. R. 606(b) does not bar such inquiry during deliberations; judge reasonably exercised discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Arizona v. Washington, 434 U.S. 497 (1978) (standard for declaring mistrial and double jeopardy analysis)
- Larson v. State, 79 P.3d 650 (Alaska App. 2003) (Evidence Rule 606(b) does not restrict juror evidence when court investigates misconduct before verdict)
- Fields v. State, 487 P.2d 831 (Alaska 1971) (recommended instruction to deadlocked juries)