Claudio v. State
Delaware Supreme Court
585 A.2d 1278 (1991)
- Written by Deanna Curl, JD
Facts
At the conclusion of Claudio’s (defendant) criminal trial, the judge instructed 12 regular jurors and three alternate jurors before the regular jurors began deliberations. After the jury failed to reach a verdict by the evening, the trial judge sequestered the jury and alternates pursuant to Delaware law. After over six hours of deliberations, one of the regular jurors became sick and had to be excused from service. The judge replaced the excused juror with the first alternate who had been separately sequestered. Claudio then requested but was denied a mistrial. The judge allowed the alternate to become a member of the regular jury and issued a special instruction that the jury was to begin new deliberations, emphasizing that the alternate should become familiar with the views of the other jurors. The new jury then deliberated for over nine hours before voting to convict Claudio. Claudio subsequently appealed his conviction, arguing that the juror substitution violated his right to a trial by jury guaranteed by the Delaware Constitution.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Holland, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
