Summary
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor expressed concern that the Supreme Court did not review the case of Stacey Humphreys, who alleged juror misconduct in his trial, which could have affected his death sentence. Sotomayor dissented, arguing that the court should have looked into the claims, which involved a juror potentially influencing the verdict improperly.
Key Facts
- Stacey Humphreys was convicted of murdering two women and received a death sentence.
- His legal team claimed a juror was biased, which they argue affected the trial's fairness.
- The Supreme Court decided not to hear Humphreys' case, as most justices declined to grant certiorari.
- Justice Sonia Sotomayor and two other justices dissented, believing the juror's conduct warranted review.
- The concerned juror allegedly misled her peers about parole eligibility to influence their decision.
- Humphreys’ attorneys stated the juror's misconduct came to light through juror affidavits but was inadmissible due to Georgia's no-impeachment rule.
- This rule generally prevents using juror testimony to challenge a verdict, even in cases involving the death penalty.
- The Georgia Supreme Court found the misconduct claims barred because they were not raised earlier in the legal process.
