In re Cowan, 5 Cal. 5th 235

In 1996 Cowan was convicted of two first-degree murders; death sentence imposed for one murder and LWOP for the other; this court affirmed on direct appeal in People v. Cowan.
While Cowan’s appeal was pending he petitioned for habeas corpus alleging juror misconduct by Juror No. 045882 for failing to disclose a 1995 misdemeanor conviction for fighting and three years’ informal probation.
The Supreme Court issued an order to show cause and appointed a referee to take evidence on whether the juror was the convicted person, why he failed to disclose, whether nondisclosure was intentional, whether it indicated bias, and whether the juror was actually biased.
At the reference hearing the juror testified he had forgotten the 1995 incident, completed the jury questionnaire quickly, and disclosed a separate 1991 incident; court records confirmed the 1995 conviction and probation.
The referee found the juror had the 1995 conviction, but his nondisclosure was an inadvertent oversight, not intentional, and was not indicative of or evidence of actual bias; the Supreme Court adopted the referee’s findings.
The court applied the substantial-likelihood-of-prejudice (objective) test and discharged the order to show cause, denying habeas relief on this juror-misconduct claim.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Juror No. 045882 was the person convicted in 1995	Cowan: yes; court records identify the juror as the convicted person	State: same; records prove identity	Held: juror was the person who pleaded guilty to public fighting and got probation and a fine
Whether juror intentionally concealed the conviction on questionnaire/voir dire	Cowan: concealment was intentional to secure jury service and curry favor with prosecutors	State: omission was inadvertent; juror forgot and viewed incident as minor	Held: omission was not intentional or deliberate (referee’s credibility finding upheld)
Whether nondisclosure indicated bias or deprived Cowan of meaningful voir dire	Cowan: concealment shows bias and prevented intelligent use of peremptory/for-cause strikes	State: no evidence of actual bias; juror came with an open mind	Held: omission not indicative of bias; no substantial likelihood of prejudice
Whether juror was actually biased against Cowan requiring relief	Cowan: juror’s conduct and testimony suggest bias influencing convictions/penalty votes	State: juror testified to impartiality; speculation insufficient	Held: juror was not actually biased; habeas claim fails

People v. Cowan, 50 Cal.4th 401 (court affirmed Cowan’s direct appeal)
People v. Duvall, 9 Cal.4th 464 (pleading and proof burdens in habeas collateral attacks)
In re Price, 51 Cal.4th 547 (petitioner must prove entitlement to relief by preponderance)
In re Hamilton, 20 Cal.4th 273 (standards for juror nondisclosure, bias, and referee deference)
In re Welch, 61 Cal.4th 489 (referee findings and review principles)
In re Thomas, 37 Cal.4th 1249 (independent review of legal conclusions and mixed questions)
People v. Boyette, 56 Cal.4th 866 (application of substantial-likelihood test for juror misconduct)