Are there any cases where a jury was ordered to return to their deliberations on the death penalty?

Nor are we persuaded by the fact certain jurors showed emotion when ordered to return to their deliberations. Participating on a jury can be an emotional experience. (See People v. Russell (2010) 50 Cal.4th 1228, 1249.) In People v. Keenan (1988) 46 Cal.3d 478, during penalty deliberations in a capital murder case, one of the jurors voting for death issued a heated "diatribe" against the lone holdout juror, causing this juror to begin "crying and shaking" and leave for the restroom, where she may have vomited. (Id. at pp. 539-540.) The same day, the jury foreman sent two notes to the trial court. After the first note, which "suggested a juror was deviating from assurances made during 'jury selection' about ability to 'vote for the death penalty' " (id. at p. 533) the trial court re-instructed the jury on its sentencing powers and duties. (Id. at pp. 528-529.) After the second note, which stated, " 'we have a juror who cannot morally vote for the death penalty,' " the trial court informed the jury there would be an investigation into whether one or more jurors were refusing to follow the law. The trial court then released the jury for the weekend. The following Monday, the foreman was questioned and revealed multiple jurors did not recall being informed during voir dire that they would be required to vote on whether to impose the death penalty, but that had been resolved. Explaining the resolution, the foreman stated: " 'There was an apology. "I needed the weekend."

Page 19