McIntire v. State

How later courts described this case

• explaining that when alleged juror misconduct is based on facts outside record, facts "must be supported by the affidavit of a juror or some other person who was in a position to know *25the facts, or must state some reason or excuse for failing to produce the affidavits" (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)
• holding that defendant put forth sufficient evidence to establish presumption of harm, where juror allegedly told unauthorized person that he was in certain judge’s courtroom and nodded in response to unauthorized person’s question about whether he was juror in defendant’s case
• noting exchange between the person and the juror “need not constitute a full blown discussion of the specifics of a given case” and holding presumption of prejudice invoked where juror told witness which court he was in and nodded his head in response to whether it was appellant’s case, after which the witness stated, “What do you do with a guy like that?”
• recognizing that the policy of requiring affidavits in support of a claim of juror misconduct is to “discourage ‘fishing expeditions’ in an effort to impeach a jury verdict”

Written by the judges who cited it.