Should a judge take partial verdicts from a deadlocked jury?

should not take partial verdicts from a deadlocked jury. In Commonwealth v. Roth , supra , 776 N.E.2d 437, the trial judge took partial verdicts on lesser included offenses. The state high court held the judge erred. "[A] judges inquiry concerning possible partial verdicts improperly intrudes on the jurys function, and we remain of the view that the ostensible benefits to be gained by such a procedure are outweighed by its risks." ( Id . at p. 446.) "Inquiry concerning partial verdicts on lesser included offenses, no matter how carefully phrased and delivered, carries a significant potential for coercion. We have previously recognized that deadlocked juries are particularly susceptible to coercion. [Citations.] ... Where the jurors have twice reported themselves deadlocked, and have already heard [a charge urging the jury to continue deliberating], a judges inquiry concerning partial verdicts cannot avoid communicating to the jury the judges desire to salvage something from

[6 Cal.5th 1105]