United States v. Louis Matthews, 709 F. App'x 481

Louis Matthews was convicted by a jury of federal drug and firearm offenses and appealed his convictions and sentence.
At jury polling after an announced verdict, Juror No. 8 disclosed she dissented, producing an 11–1 split; deliberations then continued.
Later that day the judge separated Juror No. 8 after she was found sobbing and, in an off-the-record interview outside counsel’s presence, she said she “can’t do this” and that she was very upset; the judge cut her off when she began describing deliberations.
The judge dismissed Juror No. 8 and seated an alternate; the jury verdict was then finalized and Matthews was sentenced.
On appeal, Matthews argued the dismissal violated his Sixth Amendment right to a unanimous verdict by an impartial jury under the Ninth Circuit’s Symington standard.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether dismissing a lone holdout juror after polling violated the Sixth Amendment unanimity right	Matthews: dismissal was for reasons related to juror’s views on the merits, so reversal required under Symington	Government: juror was dismissed for emotional inability to continue, not for views on the merits	Court: Reversed—reasonable possibility exists dismissal stemmed from juror’s views; violation of unanimous verdict right
Whether post-poll off-the-record interview and dismissal without counsel present was permissible	Matthews: off-record interview and dismissal without counsel deprived him of safeguards and tainted unanimity	Government: judge acted to preserve deliberations and responded to a distraught juror’s inability to continue	Court: Did not reach separate legal questions; reversal disposed the case under Symington standard

United States v. Symington, 195 F.3d 1080 (9th Cir. 1999) (establishes reversal standard when a juror is dismissed after deliberations if there is any reasonable possibility dismissal stemmed from juror’s views on the merits)