Beard

United States v. Beard

Good Law
161 F.3d 1190·98 Daily Journal DAR 11982·1998 WL 806435·1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 29814·98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8565
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 23, 1998Nos. 97-10353, 97-10410California2,540 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Tashima, J.

James Bowden Beard appeals from his conviction for money laundering and various related offenses. Beard contends that the court erred in denying his motion for a mistrial based on violations of Fed.R.Crim.P. 23(b) and 24(c). Although the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding just cause to remove two jurors, the court erred in substituting two alternate jurors in violation of Rule 24(c). We therefore reverse and remand for a new trial.

I. BACKGROUND

Beard was indicted on money laundering and related charges. His jury trial began on September 4,1996, and concluded on October 10, 1996. On October 8, 1996, during closing arguments, the court received a note from Juror No. 8, stating:

The defendant immediately moved for a mistrial and counsel stated: “[Ijt’s apparent from this that the jurors have already been discussing among themselves the facts of the case.” After questioning both jurors about the incident and the entire panel in general, the court decided that the jury had not been improperly influenced and allowed closing arguments to continue. Beard objected to excusing both jurors, as well as to excusing only Juror No. 1, and sought a mistrial. The court…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.