Estrada v. Scribner

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that “the state courts 20 correctly concluded” evidence that jurors “felt pressured to vote for second-degree murder 21 and were treated disrespectfully by other jurors” was “inadmissible as the subjective 22 ‘mental processes’” of the jurors
• finding that “the state courts 20 correctly concluded” evidence that jurors “felt pressured to vote for second-degree murder 21 and were treated disrespectfully by other jurors” was “inadmissible as the subjective 22 ‘mental processes’” of the jurors
• applying Rule 606(b) in assessing whether the district court was 9 correct that it could not consider portions of juror affidavits proffered by habeas 10 petitioner challenging state conviction
• “The presence of a biased juror is a structural error not subject to harmless error analysis.”
• “[T]he presence of a biased juror is structural error not subject to harmless error analysis. . . .”
• to establish actual bias, defendant must show that juror “failed to answer honestly a material question on voir dire” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).