This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.
Facts
The Defendant was charged with driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor (DWI), driving while license suspended or revoked, and concealing identity. During the trial, the jury initially returned a verdict of not guilty for the DWI charge, but guilty for the other charges. After the jury was discharged, the bailiff reported that some jurors claimed the DWI verdict was read incorrectly. The trial court recalled the jury, polled its members, and changed the DWI verdict to guilty, citing a clerical error (paras 2-3).
Procedural History
- District Court, Eddy County: The Defendant was convicted of DWI after the trial court changed the jury's verdict from not guilty to guilty following a jury poll (paras 1-3).
Parties' Submissions
- Defendant-Appellant: Argued that the trial court's decision to change the DWI verdict violated his constitutional right to be free from double jeopardy and that the jury polling procedure infringed upon his due process rights (para 1).
- Plaintiff-Appellee (State): Contended that the trial court acted within its authority to correct a clerical error in the verdict and that the jury remained under the court's control when it was recalled (paras 4, 10).
Legal Issues
- Did the trial court's decision to change the jury's verdict from not guilty to guilty on the DWI charge violate the Defendant's right to be free from double jeopardy?
- Was the trial court's jury polling procedure improper and in violation of the Defendant's due process rights?
Disposition
- The Court of Appeals reversed the Defendant's DWI conviction and remanded the case with instructions to vacate the conviction (para 15).
Reasons
Per Pickard J. (Castillo and Robinson JJ. concurring):
The Court held that the trial court erred in reassembling the jury after it had been formally discharged to change the DWI verdict from not guilty to guilty. The Court emphasized that once a jury is discharged, it cannot be recalled to alter its verdict, as this raises concerns about potential contamination and undermines the integrity of the jury process (paras 6-13).
The Court rejected the trial court's characterization of the change as a correction of a clerical error, noting that altering a verdict from acquittal to conviction is a substantive change, not a mere clerical correction (para 12). The Court also found that the record did not sufficiently demonstrate that the jury remained under the court's control or free from outside influence after its formal discharge (paras 10-11).
The Court concluded that the trial court's actions violated the Defendant's constitutional protection against double jeopardy, as the jury's initial not guilty verdict constituted an acquittal that could not be overturned (para 14). Consequently, the DWI conviction was reversed, and the case was remanded for the preparation of a new judgment and sentence on the other convictions, which were not challenged on appeal (para 15).