United States v. James Marshall Shackelford (84-5995), Douglas McArthur Brooks (84-5998)

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the district court has a duty to investigate juror misconduct, and has discretion in deciding the scope of the proceedings necessary to discover the misconduct
• noting that the district court has a duty to investigate juror misconduct, and has discretion in deciding the scope of the proceedings necessary to discover the misconduct
• upholding refusal to hold evidentiary hearing on absence of juror during deliberations; because jury members already had stated that outside forces had not influenced them improperly, Rule 606(b) barred further testimony
• relating to a district court’s denial of an evidentiary hearing for claims of jury misconduct
• upholding refusal to hold evidentiary hearing on absence of juror during deliberations; because jury members already had stated that outside forces had not influenced them improperly, Rule 606(b) barred further testimony
• affirming conviction where juror attended to a personal matter for a few minutes during deliberations

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).