UNITED STATES

v.

WINEBRENNER; AND UNITED STATES V. LOOSE

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Yonn, 702 F.2d 1341 (11th Cir. 1983)
  …ght to trial by “an impartial jury.” Any discussion among jurors of a case prior to formal deliberations certainly endangers that jury’s impartiality. See Edwards, 696 F. 2d 1277; Winebrenner v. United States, 147 F. 2d 322 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 325 U.S. 863, 65 S.Ct. 1197, 89 L.Ed. 1983 (1945). As the district court recognized, such conversations may lead jurors to form an opinion as to the defendant’s guilt or innocence before they have heard all of the evidence, the arguments of counsel, and the co…
• United States v. Nance, 502 F.2d 615 (8th Cir. 1974)
  …, Nance and Tileston allege jury misconduct in their collective failure to observe the court’s admonition not to discuss the case during pendency of the trial. Placing reliance on Winebrenner v. United States, 147 F. 2d 322 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 325 U.S. 863, 65 S.Ct. 1197, 89 L.Ed. 983 (1945), they argue that they were deprived of a fair trial by the improper discussions among the jurors during the course of the trial. In Winebrenner the court held that a trial court’s instruction permitting jurors to…
• United States v. Chiantese, 582 F.2d 974 (5th Cir. 1978)
  …the members of the jury may form opinions about the case before all the evidence is in and before the arguments of counsel and instructions of the court have been heard. Winebrenner v. United States, 147 F. 2d 322, 328 (8th Cir. 1945), cert. denied, 325 U.S. 863, 65 S.Ct. 1197, 89 L.Ed. 983 (1945). A juror, having formed an opinion, may be reluctant to consider the remaining evidence objectively. Our case does not fit well in this mode of analysis because the juror’s remarks did not concern the merits of t…