SALETTA v. State, 254 P.3d 111

Saletta charged with indecent or obscene exposure; jury delivers a guilty verdict after very brief deliberation.
After verdict, district court polls the jury; seventh juror dissents while six affirm, poll continues.
District court excused all but the seventh juror and held an evidentiary hearing; juror questioned about retreat from verdict.
The State moves to use an alternate juror; Saletta moves for mistrial; district court learns of NRS 175.531 and orders further deliberation.
New deliberations yield a unanimous verdict; Saletta is sentenced; issues on polling and questioning arise on appeal.
Nevada Supreme Court reverses conviction, holding polling was non-coercive but questioning dissenter violated NRS 175.531 and plain error.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether continuing the poll after a dissenter is reversible error	Saletta argues polling must stop once dissent is shown	State argues district court has discretion to poll under NRS 175.531	Continued polling not coercive; statute allows discretion; but not reversible for polling itself
Whether questioning the dissenting juror about reasons for dissent was permitted	Saletta asserts NRS 175.531 forbids questioning dissenters' reasons	State contends questioning is allowed to clarify deliberations	Prohibited by NRS 175.531; constitutes plain error requiring reversal

Spitz, 696 F.2d 916 (11th Cir. 1983) (polling after dissent treated as reversible error by some circuits)
Gambino, 951 F.2d 498 (2d Cir. 1991) (totality-of-the-circumstances test; three coercion factors)
Lyell v. Renico, 470 F.3d 1177 (6th Cir. 2006) (district court discretion to continue polling if not coercive)
Fiorilla, 850 F.2d 172 (3d Cir. 1988) (polling discretion; non-coercive methods permissible)
Amos v. United States, 496 F.2d 1269 (8th Cir. 1974) (polling discretion; coercion considerations)
Brooks v. United States, 420 F.2d 1350 (D.C. Cir. 1969) (polling discretion; avoid coercion)
Brasfield v. United States, 272 U.S. 448 (1926) (Brasfield-per se reversible error rationale rejected)
Nelson, 692 F.2d 83 (9th Cir. 1982) (protects jury deliberation secrecy; intrusion into deliberations improper)
Edwards, 469 F.2d 1362 (5th Cir. 1972) (judicial questioning of jurors after a poll improper)
Sexton, 456 F.2d 961 (5th Cir. 1972) (courts disfavor bench questioning of jurors post-poll)
Thomas, 449 F.2d 1177 (D.C. Cir. 1971) (court intrusions into jury deliberations discouraged)
White v. State, 95 Nev. 881, 603 P.2d 1064 (Nev. 1979) (Nevada authority on deliberation and coercion considerations)