| Web stirs problems in jury selection State Supreme Court rules that social network relationships should be revealed during seating
By Ry Rivard
Daily Mail Capitol Reporter
dailymail.com
CHARLESTON, W.Va. - There's a new challenge to the seating of juries in the age of social networking, the state Supreme Court has found.
The court ordered a new felony trial for a Braxton County man after a member of a jury failed to reveal she was his "friend" on the social networking website called MySpace.
In the ruling released earlier this month, the Supreme Court doesn't say potential jurors should automatically be disqualified if they are Facebook or MySpace friends of defendants but indicates they must reveal such relationships.
The court also suggests state trial judges should remind jurors not to reveal information about cases on websites or through their phones or with text messages.
The ruling came following an appeal by Christopher Shane Dellinger, a Braxton County sheriff's deputy. Dellinger was convicted in early 2008 for three counts of falsifying accounts and one count of fraud.
Dellinger applied for and oversaw grants awarded to the Braxton County Commission by the West Virginia Commission on Drunk Driving Prevention. Prosecutors allege he claimed credit for hours he had not worked and for time he spent on administrative duties related to the grants. They say the grants did not allow for payment for administrative work.
Immediately following the verdict, Dellinger's attorney notified the trial court of possible misconduct by juror Amber Hyre.
An investigation ordered by Braxton Circuit Judge Richard Facemire revealed that during jury selection Hyre had failed to reveal she had contacted Dellinger and become his friend on MySpace shortly before the trial. She was also related by marriage to one witness, and a relative worked for another.
Despite these findings, Facemire didn't order a new trial.
The Supreme Court said Hyre's "complete lack of candor" during jury selection violated Dellinger's right to a fair trial.
The court documents indicate Hyre had sent Dellinger a message shortly before the trial about his divorce, which had happened two years earlier.
"Hey, I don't know you very well, but I think you could use some advice!" she wrote.
She added, "I know it is hard but just remember that God is perfect and has the most perfect plan for your life. Talk soon!"
After the message, the two became friends on the website.
For his part, Dellinger said that Hyre looked "very different" from her photograph on the website and that he didn't recognize her during jury selection.
During the trial court's investigation of the incident, Hyre admitted she had made a "bad judgment" in not telling lawyers she knew Dellinger.
"I just didn't feel like I really knew him," Hyre said.
"I believe that God was telling that I should've and disobeyed. So, yeah, I figure I probably would have said something just to keep my heart in the right place ... I mean, I wasn't - it didn't seem like it was very important, I mean, because I knew in my heart that I didn't know him."
She added, "But I feel now, with all this going, maybe I should have at least said that, you know, that he was on MySpace, which really isn't that important, I didn't think."
Hyre also failed to disclose her connection to two witnesses in the case. Hyre is a sister-in-law and close personal friend of the daughter of one witness. Hyre's brother-in-law worked for another witness.
Facemire, in refusing to grant a new trial, said those connections were "very tenuous" because Hyre hadn't spoken with the actual witness in the first instance and her connection to the second was "very weak."
Facemire said if the court required jurors to disclose such connections, it would have "great difficulty in selecting juries."
"In a rural area with a small population, it is not unusual to have jurors with varying connections with parties and witness," the judge wrote when he declined to grant the appeal. "The issue is if the juror can be fair and impartial."
Facemire said he believed Hyre was able to be fair and impartial.
"She did not personally know the Defendant or the witnesses in question, and she did not have any knowledge of the case beyond what was presented at trial," he wrote.
The Supreme Court disagreed.
"Juror Hyre's repeated lack of candor clearly undermined the purpose of (jury selection) and, as a result, deprived (Dellinger) of the ability to determine whether she harbored any prejudices or biases against him or in favor of the State," it said in an unsigned opinion.
It added, that Hyre "intentionally and repeatedly failed to be forthcoming about her connections to Appellant and witnesses (...) arguably, in order to improve her chances of serving on Appellant's jury. Whatever her reasons for doing so, she cannot be considered to have been indifferent or unbiased."
Hyre, during the trial, also updated her MySpace status to say, "Just got home from Court and getting ready to get James and Head to church! Then back to court in the morning!" Next to part of the site that allows users to indicate mood, she chose, "blah."
The Supreme Court used a footnote to suggest that trial judges warn jurors from communicating about ongoing trials.
"We believe that, standing alone, it was not sufficient to find that she engaged in juror misconduct," the court said of her MySpace update during the trial.
"However, we also believe some cautionary words are warranted concerning the prominent presence of the internet and routine use of and dependence upon various technologies by everyday Americans called to jury service."
The court suggests that judges tell jurors not to "communicate with anyone about the case on your cell phone, through e-mail, Blackberry, iPhone, text messaging, or on Twitter, through any blog or website, through any internet chat room, or by way of any other social networking websites, including Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn, and YouTube."
Robert Goldberg, an assistant state attorney general who represented the trial court in the Supreme Court case, said he was disappointed with the higher court's ruling but thought it was a "reasonable view of the record."
He said the court's footnote is a call to action for judges across the state.
"Usually when the Supreme Court says it's a good idea, it usually behooves you to pick up on the hint," Goldberg said. "I would say it would be in every judge's best interest to take a real close look at that footnote."
Contact writer Ry Rivard at ry.rivard@dailymail.com or 304-348-1796.
dailymail.com
See related stories:
FORMER OFFICER DELLINGER CHARGED WITH FALSIFYING RECORDS
BRAXTON SHERIFF SAYS HE TRUSTED DELLINGER
FORMER GRANTSVILLE VOLUNTEER POLICEMAN UNDER INVESTIGATION
FORMER GRANTSVILLE POLICE OFFICER SENTENCED - Dellinger Will Serve Jail Time
| 
