State v. Huff, 298 Neb. 522

Jeffrey A. Huff was tried for first‑degree sexual assault; after voir dire 12 jurors and one alternate were sworn and trial began.
After the first day, juror M.F. told the court he felt unsuitable for jury service because of his upbringing; after questioning he agreed he could be impartial.
The court initially denied the State’s oral motion to strike M.F. for cause and proceeded with trial.
After both parties rested, the court observed M.F. appeared inattentive (took no notes) and the State produced M.F.’s criminal record and his juror questionnaire showing numerous undisclosed misdemeanor convictions.
The court discharged (removed) M.F. before deliberations and replaced him with the alternate; Huff objected and moved for a mistrial, which the court denied.
Huff appealed; the Court of Appeals affirmed, and the Nebraska Supreme Court granted further review limited to the juror removal and mistrial issues and affirmed the conviction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the court properly discharged M.F. after he was sworn	State: M.F. was not forthcoming on questionnaire, appeared inattentive, and thus discharge under §29‑2004(2) was proper	Huff: State waived any challenge by not raising it during voir dire and court should have questioned M.F. before discharge	Court: No abuse of discretion — discharge permissible under §29‑2004(2) based on totality (juror’s own statements, inattentiveness, and undisclosed convictions); questioning preferred but not required here
Whether the denial of Huff’s mistrial motion was error	State: Replacement with alternate cured any potential prejudice; no bias shown	Huff: Discharge prejudiced his right to an impartial jury and warranted mistrial	Court: Denial affirmed because discharge was not an abuse of discretion and no prejudice shown

State v. Hilding, 278 Neb. 115 (Neb. 2009) (trial court discretion to retain or reject jurors applies after trial begins)
State v. Myers, 190 Neb. 466 (Neb. 1973) (court must hear evidence and examine jurors when grounds for disqualification arise after jury sworn)
State v. Harris, 264 Neb. 856 (Neb. 2002) (no waiver where juror deliberately concealed disqualifying convictions)
Turley v. State, 74 Neb. 471 (Neb. 1905) (defendant must timely object during voir dire when diligence could have discovered juror issue)
McDonough Power Equip., Inc. v. Greenwood, 464 U.S. 548 (U.S. 1984) (juror dishonesty on voir dire relevant only if it demonstrates actual bias)
State v. Robinson, 272 Neb. 582 (Neb. 2006) (upholding removal for juror sleeping/inattentiveness during trial)