State v. Bondurant

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that when “the State fails to meet the burden of showing that the separation did not result in prejudice, a -27- new trial is required”
• holding that the court‟s officer‟s affidavit, which clearly and unequivocally stated that he had no control over the jurors when they drove their personal vehicles between their hotel and the courthouse, was sufficient to show an actual separation of the jury
• holding that the defendant had “established a prima facie showing of [a] jury separation” when the jurors were allowed to drive themselves between their hotel and the courthouse and the court officer submitted an affidavit that he had no control over the jurors during that time
• rejecting the defendant’s motion to quash the indictment in the absence of any proof that discrimination tainted the entire grand jury
• affirming death sentence where defendant dismembered the victim=s body

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).