2012 COA 193
Colo. Ct. App.2012Background
- Defendant Pena-Rodriguez was convicted of unlawful sexual contact and harassment after jury trial.
- Two jurors disclosed to defense counsel that Juror 11 made racially biased statements during deliberations.
- The defense sought access to juror contact information; the trial court imposed limited access and required affidavits from the two reporting jurors.
- Two affidavits alleged Juror 11 said the defendant was guilty because he is Mexican and that Mexican men are controlling toward women.
- The trial court held an evidentiary hearing focused on Juror 11's law enforcement connections, not racial bias, and found the misrepresentation inadvertent; no new trial was granted.
- The majority held CRE 606(b) bars the affidavits as inadmissible and that defense waived any right to challenge the verdict on this basis by not specifically asking about racial bias during voir dire.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of juror affidavits under CRE 606(b) | Pena-Rodriguez argues affidavits show bias during deliberations. | Beings that bias existed, the affidavits should be admissible to void the verdict. | Affidavits inadmissible under CRE 606(b). |
| Extraneous information or outside influence exceptions | Statements of bias are extraneous information affecting deliberations. | Bias evidence falls within CRE 606(b) exceptions for extraneous information/outside influence. | Extraneous information and outside influence exceptions do not apply. |
| Waiver of constitutional challenge to juror bias | Voir dire failed to elicit racial bias; defendant preserved rights regardless. | Failure to question about race does not bar as-applied constitutional challenge. | Defendant waived the challenge because he could have raised it during voir dire; CRE 606(b) applies. |
| Constitutional balance of CRE 606(b) as applied | CRE 606(b) should yield to Sixth Amendment impartial jury right in racial-bias cases. | WAIVER aside, CRE 606(b) impairs Sixth Amendment; the rule should yield. | Court declines to decide broader balance; defendant failed to timely pursue bias; majority sustains CRE 606(b) as applied. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Mollaun, 194 P.3d 411 (Colo.App.2008) (abuse of discretion standard for post-trial juror misconduct)
- Stewart v. Rice, 47 P.3d 316 (Colo.2002) (CRE 606(b) limits on juror testimony; finality of verdict)
- Tanner v. United States, 483 U.S. 107 (1987) (voir dire and Tanner factors balance against juror testimony on deliberations)
- Beeman v. People, 565 P.2d 1340 (Colo.1977) (actual bias requires personal, emotional connection)
- McDonough Power Equip., Inc. v. Greenwood, 464 U.S. 548 (1984) (voir dire effectiveness in assuring impartial juries)