United States First Circuit

The district court's grant of defendant's habeas corpus petition, alleging that juror dishonesty during the voir dire process antecedent to the death penalty-phase hearing deprived defendant of an impartial jury, is affirmed and a new penalty-phase hearing shall be conducted, where: 1) jurisdiction exists under the court's advisory mandamus power; 2) the district court did not apply the correct legal framework; but 3) Juror C failed to answer honestly one or more material voir dire questions; 4) here, there was a sufficient showing that a reasonable judge, armed with the information that the dishonest juror failed to disclose and the reason behind the juror's dishonesty, would conclude under the totality of the circumstances that the juror lacked the capacity and the will to decide the case based on the evidence, and therefore, a valid basis for excusal for cause existed; and therefore, 5) defendant was deprived of the right to an impartial jury and is entitled to a new penalty-phase hearing.

Appellate Information

• Decided 07/25/2013
• Published 07/25/2013

Judges

• SELYA

Court

• United States First Circuit

Counsel