U.S. v. Taylor

• Decision Date: 17 June 1977
• Docket Number: No. 76-2715,76-2715
• Citation: 554 F.2d 200
• Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alfred J. TAYLOR, Jr., a/k/a Red, and Joseph M. Dean, Defendants-Appellants.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit

Page 200

554 F.2d 200

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alfred J. TAYLOR, Jr., a/k/a Red, and Joseph M. Dean Defendants-Appellants.

No. 76-2715.

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.

June 17, 1977.

Birch McDonough (Court-appointed), New Orleans, La., for Taylor.

Harry A. Burglass, Metairie, La., for Dean.

Gerald J. Gallinghouse, U. S. Atty., Mary Williams Cazalas, Daniel A. Bent, Ronald A. Fonseca, Asst. U. S. Attys., New Orleans, La., for plaintiff-appellee.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.

Before MORGAN and RONEY, Circuit Judges, and KING ^*, District judge.

JAMES LAWRENCE KING, District Judge:

The appellants were convicted of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and distribution of a controlled substance. In this appeal, they assert six grounds for reversal. Finding merit in one, we reverse.

Prior to the selection of the jury, Mrs. Sevely, a prospective juror, requested excuse from jury duty. This request was denied, and she was subsequently selected to serve on the appellants' jury. The night of the second day of trial, she telephoned the trial judge in an emotional state, complaining about the denial of her request to be excused.

The judge held a conference with the attorneys on the afternoon of the third day of trial and informed them of his conversation with juror Sevely. The defense objected to an excuse of this particular juror because the alternate juror was a man who they believed to be adverse to the defendants. Counsel agreed to a private discussion in chambers between the judge and the juror.

The conference with juror Sevely revealed that she was a student at Tulane University and felt that jury duty might jeopardize a semester of school work. The following colloquy then ensued:

THE COURT: Unfortunately, Madam, I can't excuse you now. We have only about two more days to go with this case. What I will do, if you would like, is excuse you after this case is over from any further jury duty. I will do that for you.

JUROR SEVELY: There are a number of other things that bother me.

THE COURT: Here is the problem, Mrs. Sevely: The problem is we have an Alternate Juror there, and if there is any illness, if I were to excuse you and put this Alternate Juror in the box and there was an illness, I have a mistrial after three or five days of trial, an enormous expenditure of money. We'll have to start over again if we have a mistrial.

JUROR SEVELY: May I make a recommendation? It might have some influence in this procedure of selecting a jury. Since a lot of money is involved, and I don't want to take unnecessary time, all of the people involved are informed, and I feel that a member of as a citizen, who is being selected to participate in a jury, I am uninformed. I have no knowledge about what the case is, what is involved. When you asked us to sift through our conscience, I could not sift through my conscience fully with that bit of information. There are many things I feel about this case now that I think would have made me answer differently, but I did not know, I had no way of being informed at that point.

THE COURT: Mrs. Sevely, there isn't any way to tell you any more than what I told you. That is not our system of jurisprudence. Most people are like yourself, Mrs. Sevely, serving for the first time. That is the concept of American justice. We take people from all facets of society. That is the basic concept.

JUROR SEVELY: May I have more basic information? I apparently appear on a list of people serving on this Jury, and my address and my information that I have submitted to the Court is on that list, isn't it?

THE COURT: That is right, yes.

JUROR SEVELY: Who has access to that list?

THE COURT: Nobody.

JUROR SEVELY: Who sees that information?

THE COURT: The Judges and the Clerks. Also the attorneys no, the attorneys don't generally see that list at all, but the your address, your address is shown on the sheet that everybody has got. They have got to know about you, Madam.

JUROR SEVELY: I understand your position and I know a lot of money is involved.

I feel that as a citizen myself that my life is involved. I live in the neighborhood with these blacks. This incident that occurred in this trial occurred within four blocks of my door, and before I moved to my house I lived one block away from where this transaction where these people

THE COURT: When I asked you if there was any reason why you couldn't act as a fair and impartial Juror, why couldn't you tell me that?

JUROR SEVELY: Because I had no information on which to answer. I know this now, and I don't like being in this relationship.

THE COURT: All I had at that time was the indictment and the charge, and that's all I can give you. That's all I have.

JUROR SEVELY: I have to go out of my way to avoid seeing these people. They are in that neighborhood. I don't think this a very good situation that I find myself in, and I feel there must be some way that I can relieve myself of this.

The other thing is that I have been a victim of these people. It is in the police reports, and I felt that at the time I well, I was open-minded, but in the process of witnessing all of this, it has rekindled my fears. I don't like to be subjected to this, and I don't know at this point if I can be very open-minded about it.

THE COURT: It is a little late in the day for that. Sorry. You will have to do like every other Juror does. As I told you, I think we will conclude this case Tuesday, Tuesday night, and thereafter I will excuse you, Judge Boyle will excuse you, and you will have been excused twice. There is no problem at all.

Your name will be stricken from the panel, from the panel of prospective jurors, after this case.

Appellants contend that it was...