High Court Action

Oct. 30 <br> -- Coin Flip Case Declined Justices Want Govt. Opinion on Klan Case Court Will Hear Tribal Immunity Case Tobacco Settlement Challenge Nixed

Court Won’t Hear Coin Toss Case

The Supreme Court announced today it has declined to decide whether a holdout juror can make up his mind with the flip of acoin.

Isidro Samuel Reyes was convicted in California on a cocainecharge after a jury in the Los Angeles area deliberated for twodays in November 1995. Later, his lawyers learned that one jurorhad consistently voted to acquit Reyes through most of thedeliberations, but changed his vote to guilty after flipping aquarter during the final lunch break.

“Juror F” apparently decided on his own to cast his vote basedon a best-of-three coin toss. He testified later that he decidedthat heads would be guilty, tails innocent. He flipped a quartertwice, and got heads both times.

Reyes’ lawyers say the jury came back from lunch and votedunanimously to convict him. Reyes was later sentenced to sevenyears in prison.

When the coin flip came to light, based on the juror’s ownaccounting of it, Reyes unsuccessfully sought a new trial. Thejuror testified that he never changed his opinion of Reyes’innocence, but decided to “go along with the flow.”

“It was 25 cents that had got them [to persuade] me to give averdict against what I really believed,” the juror testified.

Appeals judges in California found that one juror’s solo cointoss is not the same thing as the whole jury deciding guilt orinnocence that way.

In court papers, Reyes’ lawyer argued that the Supreme Courtshould decide whether the coin toss meant Reyes did not get a fairverdict based on the evidence.

“The most elementary duty of each juror is to listen carefully,follow the trial proceedings and to evaluate the strengths andweaknesses of the evidence and arguments,” Los Angeles lawyerTerrence Roden argued.