The Arkansas Supreme Court ruling in Dimas-Martinez v. Arkansas is available in Adobe .pdf format.
The Arkansas News Bureau reports, "Murder conviction overturned because of tweeting, sleeping jurors." It's written by John Lyon. Here's an extended excerpt:
The state Supreme Court overturned a death-row inmate’s murder conviction today because of jurors who tweeted and slept during his trial.
The high court also said that because of changing technology, it is time to consider whether jurors should continue to be allowed access to mobile phones during trials.
The Supreme Court ordered a new trial in Benton County Circuit Court for Erickson Dimas-Martinez in the Dec. 30, 2006, shooting death of 17-year-old Derrick Jefferson in Springdale. Dimas-Martinez had been sentenced to death for capital murder and life in prison for aggravated robbery.
An attorney for Dimas-Martinez, now 26, said last month in oral arguments before the Supreme Court that the trial judge should have dismissed a juror who sent messages via Twitter from the jury box and the deliberation room during the trial.
The trial judge instructed jurors at the start of the trial not to tweet about the case and not to discuss the case with anyone. During the sentencing phase, a juror tweeted, “Choices to be made. Hearts to be broken. We each define the great line.”
Dimas-Martinez’s trial lawyer told the judge about the tweet, and the judge questioned the juror. The juror explained that he was preparing himself to make a decision about the death penalty and was making a reference to the album “Define the Great Line” by the band Underoath.
The juror said he had not revealed any particulars of the case. Over the defense attorney’s objection, the judge did not strike the juror.
The juror continued to send tweets after being questioned by the judge. Among them was the tweet “It is over,” sent nearly an hour before the jury announced it had reached a verdict.
In its unanimous opinion reversing the conviction, the Supreme Court said the tweets were a public discussion of the case, in violation of the judge’s instructions.
“This court has recognized the importance that jurors not be allowed to post musings, thoughts or any other information about trials on any online forums,” Justice Donald Corbin wrote in the opinion. “The possibility for prejudice is simply too high. Such a fact is underscored in this case, as appellant points out, because one of the juror’s Twitter followers was a reporter.”
"Death row inmate gets new trial because of tweet," by Jeannie Nuss for the AP, via Business Week.
Erickson Dimas-Martinez's attorneys had appealed his 2010 murder conviction because a juror sent the tweets despite the judge's instruction not to post on the Internet or communicate with anyone about the case. The lawyers also complained that another juror slept.
In one tweet, juror Randy Franco wrote: "Choices to be made. Hearts to be broken...We each define the great line." Less than an hour before the jury announced its verdict, he tweeted: "It's over."
Other tweets by Franco made passing references to the trial, with posts such as, "the coffee sucks here" and "Court. Day 5. Here we go again."
The court said Franco, known as Juror 2 in court documents, violated general instructions to not discuss the case. Before opening arguments, the judge said: "Just remember, never discuss this case over your cell phone. .... and don't Twitter anybody about this case."
"Because of the very nature of Twitter as an ... online social media site, Juror 2's tweets about the trial were very much public discussions. Even if such discussions were one-sided, it is in no way appropriate for a juror to state musings, thoughts, or other information about a case in such a public fashion," Associate Justice Donald Corbin wrote.
The justices also used the case to point out that a wide array of juror misconduct can come into play when jurors have unrestricted access to their cell phones during a trial.
"Most mobile phones now allow instant access to a myriad of information. Not only can jurors access Facebook, Twitter, or other social media sites, but they can also access news sites that might have information about a case," Corbin wrote.
"Arkansas death row inmate gets new trial because of tweets," by Suzi Parker for Reuters.
A lower court denied Dimas-Martinez' motion for a new trial, stating he "suffered no prejudice."
In an earlier case before the state Supreme court, the state argued that the juror's tweets were about his feelings and not the case.
In Thursday's courts opinion, Associate Justice Donald Corbin wrote that "prejudice results from the fact that the juror admitted to the misconduct, which proves that he failed to follow the court's instructions, and it is the failure to follow the law that prejudiced Appellant."
The Arkansas Supreme Court has a provision in place that states that "electronic devices shall not be used in the courtroom to broadcast, record, photograph, e-mail, blog, tweet, text, post, or transmit by any other means except as may be allowed by the court."
As a result, Corbin wrote that the risk of prejudice is "simply too high' to allow jurors to post any information or "musings" online.
Corbin wrote that the court now wants its committees on criminal practice and civil practice to consider whether jurors' access to mobile phones should be limited during a trial.
The Arkansas case is the latest of a number across the country dealing with use of social networking by jurors during trials.
Comments