Ex Parte Ciervo., 342 So. 2d 403 (Ala. 1977). · Go Syfert
Search
Ex Parte Ciervo., 342 So. 2d 403 (Ala. 1977). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 4× by 4 distinct cases, last quoted 2011 · …whether there has been a communication with a juror and whether it has caused prejudice are questions of fact to be determined by the trial court in the exercise of sound discretion. at p. 404 ⚠ not in text Topic ↗
35 citation events (9 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Woodward v. State (alacrimapp, 2011-12-16)
Treatment trajectory · 1977 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1977 2001 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Woodward v. State
Ala. Crim. App. · 2011 · confidence medium
“Whether there has been a communication with a juror and whether it has caused prejudice are questions of fact to be determined by the trial court in the exercise of sound discretion.” Gaffney v. State, 342 So.2d 403, 404 (Ala.Crim.App.1976).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Reynolds v. State
Ala. Crim. App. · 2010 · confidence medium
Before addressing each allegation separately below, we will set forth the applicable law. “ ‘ “Whether there has been a communication with a juror and whether it has caused prejudice are questions of fact to be determined by the trial court in the exercise of sound discretion.” ’ Burgess v. State, 827 So.2d 134, 157 (Ala.Cr.App.1998), quoting Gaffney v. State, 342 So.2d 403, 404 (Ala.Cr.App.1976), cert. denied, 342 So.2d 404 (Ala.1977).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Minor v. State
Ala. Crim. App. · 2004 · confidence medium
Whether there has been a communication with the juror and whether it has caused prejudice are fact questions to be determined by the Court in the exercise of sound discretion." Gaffney v. State, 342 So.2d 403, 404 (Ala.Crim.App.1976).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Gamble v. State
Ala. Crim. App. · 2000 · confidence medium
Several other members of Ms. Burleson's family testified that Ms. Burleson was not in court on Thursday and that they had not seen her having a discussion with a juror in front of the vending machines. "`Whether there has been a communication with a juror and whether it has caused prejudice are questions of fact to be determined by the trial court in the exercise of sound discretion.'" Burgess v. State, [Ms. CR-93-2054, November 20, 1998] ___ So.2d ___, ___ (Ala.Cr.App. 1998), quoting Gaffney v. State, 342 So.2d 403, 404 (Ala.Cr.App.1976), cert. denied, 342 So.2d 404 (Ala.1977).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Taylor v. State
Ala. Crim. App. · 2000 · confidence medium
"Whether there has been a communication with a juror and whether it has caused prejudice are questions of fact to be determined by the trial court in the exercise of sound discretion." Gaffney v. State, 342 So.2d 403, 404 (Ala.Cr.App. 1976), cert. denied, 342 So.2d 404 (Ala. 1977). "`In cases involving juror misconduct, a trial court generally will not be held to have abused its discretion "where the trial court investigates the circumstances under which the remark was made, its substance, and determines that the rights of the appellant were not prejudiced by the remark." Bascom v. State, 344 …
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Burgess v. State
Ala. Crim. App. · 1998 · confidence medium
Rule 45A, Ala.R.App.P. *157 "Whether there has been a communication with a juror and whether it has caused prejudice are questions of fact to be determined by the trial court in the exercise of sound discretion." Gaffney v. State, 342 So.2d 403, 404 (Ala.Cr.App. 1976), cert. denied, 342 So.2d 404 (Ala. 1977).
discussed Cited "see" McMillan v. State
Ala. Crim. App. · 2010 · signal: see · confidence high
See Smith v. State, [Ms. CR-97-1258, August 31, 2007] — So.3d -, - (Ala.Crim.App.2007) (opinion after remand from the Alabama Supreme Court) (“any error in the failure to remove M.T. on the basis of her conversation with a victim’s family member was harmless”). “ ‘ “Whether there has been a communication with a juror and whether it has caused prejudice are questions of fact to be determined by the trial court in the exercise of sound discretion.” ’ Burgess v. State, 827 So.2d 134, 157 (Ala.Cr.App.1998), quoting Gaffney v. State, 342 So.2d 403, 404 (Ala.Cr.App.1976), cert. den…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Ex parte Joseph CIERVO.
Supreme Court of Alabama.
Feb 25, 1977.
342 So. 2d 403
Maddox.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published

MADDOX, Justice.

WRIT DENIED.

TORBERT, C.J., and FAULKNER, SHORES and BEATTY, JJ., concur.