California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Salton Bay Marina, Inc. v. Imperial Irr. Dist., 165 Cal.App.3d 952, 212 Cal.Rptr. 701 (Cal. App. 1985):
In People v. Thornton, 155 Cal.App.3d 845, 856, 202 Cal.Rptr. 448, the court in discussing whether a judge could recall a jury who had been discharged, observed:
"Regardless of whether and why the discharge may be erroneous, it results in sending the jurors back to the outside world freed of all the admonitions that previously guarded their judgments from improper influences. Once freed, the jurors can properly discuss the case with the district attorney and the People's witnesses, they can read about it in the media and they can entertain 'facts' or opinions about it from any source.... Once control is lost it would be fatuous to treat the case as if the discharge were merely a fiction. The conclusion is inescapable that a discharge accompanied by loss of control of the jury divests the court of jurisdiction to reconvene them whether or not a complete verdict was rendered and whether or not any error occurred at all. To conclude otherwise would pose 'an unacceptable risk of interference with duly rendered verdicts.' (Cf. People v. Romero, supra, 31 Cal.3d 685, 689 [183 Cal.Rptr. 663, 646 P.2d 824].)"
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.