State v. Stevens, 2015 Ohio 307

Defendant Timmy Stevens shot into a car during an altercation, killing John Davis and injuring a child; Stevens was indicted and convicted of murder (with firearm spec), felonious assault (with firearm spec), and several related offenses, and found a repeat violent offender.
Trial court imposed an aggregate sentence including an indefinite 15 years–to–life term for murder plus consecutive and concurrent terms for specifications and other counts.
After conviction, defense counsel learned a juror (Noah Matthews) had a sister who was raped and murdered in 2009 and alleged Matthews failed to disclose that during voir dire; defense filed a motion for a new trial alleging juror nondisclosure/misconduct.
This court (Stevens I) remanded for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the juror’s nondisclosure was material and whether an accurate answer would have provided a valid for-cause basis that would have succeeded despite any rehabilitation.
On remand the trial court held a hearing, heard Matthews testify that his sister’s murder did not affect his impartiality and that he voluntarily chose not to answer voir dire questions; the trial court again denied the new-trial motion.
On appeal the Fifth District affirmed the trial court, finding no abuse of discretion in denying the new trial because Matthews’ nondisclosure did not establish a successful for-cause challenge or prejudice to Stevens.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether nondisclosure of a juror’s family history during voir dire warrants a new trial for juror misconduct	State: trial court properly exercised discretion; no showing of prejudice or successful for-cause basis	Stevens: juror deliberately concealed a sister’s murder and rape; an honest answer would have provided a for-cause basis and prejudiced his rights	Court held no abuse of discretion; nondisclosure did not establish a valid, successful for-cause challenge or prejudice

Grundy v. Dhillon, 120 Ohio St.3d 415, 900 N.E.2d 153 (Ohio 2008) (moving party must show juror failed to answer honestly and that nondisclosure prejudiced the party by providing a valid for-cause basis)
State v. Williams, 79 Ohio St.3d 1, 679 N.E.2d 646 (Ohio 1997) (court may infer bias from deliberate concealment by a juror)
State v. Murphy, 91 Ohio St.3d 516, 747 N.E.2d 765 (Ohio 2001) (a close relative’s status as a crime victim does not automatically disqualify a juror)
Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217, 450 N.E.2d 1140 (Ohio 1983) (appellate review of abuse of discretion standard)
State v. Petro, 148 Ohio St. 505, 76 N.E.2d 370 (Ohio 1947) (new-trial motions lie in trial court’s discretion)
U.S. v. Curry, 497 F.2d 99 (5th Cir. 1974) (trial judge’s firsthand exposure to proceedings informs credibility assessments)