What is the test for removing a juror from a jury for failing to deliberate?

It is well established that "'the secrecy of deliberations is essential to the proper functioning of juries.'" (People v. Cleveland (2001) 25 Cal.4th 466, 481-482 (Cleveland), quoting United States v. Thomas (2d Cir. 1997) 116 F.3d 606, 617-619.) Thus, "'[a]s a general rule, no one - including the judge presiding at a trial - has a "right to know" how a jury, or any individual juror, has deliberated or how a decision was reached by a jury or juror.'" (Ibid.; see generally Evid. Code, 1150, which prohibits the impeachment of a verdict by evidence of the jurors' mental processes.)

"The need to protect the sanctity of jury deliberations, however, does not preclude reasonable inquiry by the court into allegations of misconduct during deliberations." (Cleveland, supra, 25 Cal.4th at p. 476.) Because juror misconduct can undermine the fairness of a trial, once the court is "informed of allegations which, if proven true, would constitute good cause for a juror's removal, a hearing is required. [Citations.]" (People v. Barnwell, supra, 41 Cal.4th at p. 1051.)

Juror misconduct can take many forms, including failing to deliberate. (People v. Engelman (2002) 28 Cal.4th 436, 440, 442 (Engelman) [a juror who fails or refuses to deliberate is subject to removal by the court].) But in investigating a claim that one or more jurors is shirking the responsibility to deliberate, trial courts must distinguish "between a juror who cannot fairly deliberate because of bias and one who, in good faith, disagrees with the others and holds his or her ground. 'The circumstance that a juror does not deliberate well or relies upon faulty logic or analysis does not constitute a refusal to deliberate and is not a ground for discharge. Similarly, the circumstance that a juror disagrees with the majority of the jury as to what the evidence shows, or how the law should be applied to the facts, or the manner in which deliberations should be conducted does not constitute a refusal to deliberate and is not a ground for discharge. A juror who has participated in deliberations for a reasonable period of time may not be discharged for refusing to deliberate, simply because the juror expresses the belief that

Page 53