Petitioner asks this Court to interpret Fed. R. Evid. 606(b) as permitting statements made by jurors during deliberations to be admitted to support a motion for a new trial. The practical consequences of petitioner’s rule would be significant and problematic, not only fundamentally altering the purpose and practice of voir dire, but also providing a new, fact driven, basis for post-trial motions. These expanded proceedings would place substantial additional burdens of courts, lawyers and jurors alike. In light of existing mechanisms to ensure juror honesty and impartiality, petitioner’s rule would disrupt a well-functioning system for little to no benefit.
Crump, Susan; Gershman, Bennett; Gold, Victor; Rothstein, Paul F.; and Trachtenberg, Ben, "On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, Brief of Law Professors as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondent, Gregory P. Warger, v. Randy D. Shauers" (2014). U.S. Supreme Court Briefs. 76.