Jason Payne v. Joe McGrath

MEMORANDUM *

California state prisoners Jason Payne and Toriano Young (“petitioners”) appeal the district court’s denial of their 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petitions. We affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and legal history of this case, we need not recount it in detail here.

This case has a number of disturbing aspects. The jurors and the prosecution team lunched and drank alcohol together following the verdict. At the lunch, one of the jurors commenced a romantic relationship with the lead detective, who was a key prosecution witness. The trial judge ordered the prosecutor, who was a percipient witness, to submit an affidavit disclosing how he came to know of the relationship. But the prosecutor failed to do so until four years had passed and the trial judge had lost jurisdiction of the case. When confronted with the allegation of potential juror bias, the trial judge prohibited defense counsel from contacting the jurors, although the jurors had obviously been in close post-trial contact with the prosecution team.

However, the propriety of the post-trial activities is not relevant to our inquiry. The narrow question before us on federal habeas…

Concurring:

I concur but add these views: The salient fact is that after conviction through trial by jury, the state trial court learned that the government’s lead witness detective and an involved juror had developed a personal dating relationship after the trial concluded. It would have been a superior state court proceeding, and consistent with the traditional values we give to advocacy, if the trial judge had permitted counsel’s inquiry to all jurors if any were aware of a relationship between the government’s lead witness detective and the involved juror commencing before the verdict was rendered and the jury dismissed. In my view the only pertinent issue concerned timing. If the relationship developed during trial, then I would conclude that habe-as corpus relief would be warranted because of implied bias, but if it started after trial, it would not have affected the verdict.

Notwithstanding, I agree that no United States Supreme Court decision has precisely defined the scope of a proceeding to be undertaken by a state court to assess possible juror bias. Because the state appellate court found no abuse of discretion in how the trial court handled the potential juror bias…

FILED

NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 07 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S . CO U RT OF AP PE A LS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JASON J. PAYNE, No. 10-16813

Petitioner - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:07-cv-04712-JSW

v.

MEMORANDUM *

JOE MCGRATH, Warden,

Respondent - Appellee.

TORIANO YOUNG, No. 10-16820

Petitioner - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:07-cv-03905-JSW

v.

JOE MCGRATH,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Jeffrey S. White, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted November 15, 2011 San Francisco, California

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. Before: THOMAS, GOULD, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoners Jason Payne and Toriano Young ('petitioners')

appeal the district court's denial of their 28 U.S.C. y 2254 habeas corpus petitions.

We affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and legal history of

this case, we need not…