NVR Logo
Appeals panel voids conviction because of juror’s blog
Saturday, June 16, 2007
Save and Share Share
SAN DIEGO — A state appeals court has voided a man’s burglary conviction because one of the jurors misled lawyers and wrote a blog about deliberations during the trial.

An unpublished opinion released Thursday by a three-judge panel of the 4th District Court of Appeals found that the defendant, Donald McNeely, must be allowed a hearing to determine whether the jury was biased before the conviction can stand.
According to court documents, a juror who served as foreman bragged in his blog about hiding the fact that he was a licensed attorney during jury selection, instead telling the court that he worked as a project manager for a technology company. “More neutral than lawyer, don’t ya think,” the man wrote.

He also posted detailed accounts of jury deliberations, writing, “Nowhere do I recall the jury instructions mandating I can’t post comments in my blog about the trial. (Ha. Sorry, will do.)”
The trial judge in the case threatened to report the juror to the state bar but accepted the verdict.

McNeely was sentenced under California’s three-strikes law to at least 38 years in prison after being found guilty of burglary, grand theft and receiving stolen property in March 2006.
If McNeely is denied a new trial, his conviction on multiple counts of burglary, grand theft and receiving stolen property may be reinstated, according to the court opinion.

McNeely’s attorney, Waldemar Halka, said he believes the conviction should have been automatically reversed. He said he plans to ask for a rehearing at the appeals court before the opinion becomes final.

“I think my guy should get a new trial,” Halka said. “This whole thing, it just smells bad.”

McNeely has not challenged the evidence presented at trial. He was accused of entering guest rooms at two hotels in the La Jolla area in October 2005 and stealing credit cards, laptop computers and digital cameras.

McNeely has 11 prior prison-term convictions, according to prosecutors.
No comments posted.
Comment Guidelines
The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.
What gets your comment posted?
• Staying on topic
• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less
• Avoiding name-calling
• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger
What gets your comment deleted?
• Personal attacks
• Derogatory remarks
• Name-calling of any sort
• Going off-topic
• Hate speech
• Racially-insensitive comments
• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict
• Posting e-mail addresses
• Posting comments of a commercial nature
• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS
• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.
The fine print
- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.
- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.
- Comments may take several hours to be posted.
- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.
- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.
- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.
Search:
Web Search Powered
By Yahoo! Search
Napa Valley Register on Facebook
Copyright © 2009 Napa Valley Publishing, a member of Lee Enterprises, Inc.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy