Opinion
No. 124956.
April 9, 2004.
Leave to Appeal Denied.
No. 124956; Court of Appeals No. 243035.
I would grant leave in this case. We are asked to explore the limits of the trial court's authority to require further deliberations after the jury first announces its verdict. This is not the first time that the question has been brought before us. See, e.g., People v. Gabor, 237 Mich App 501 (1999), lv den 462 Mich 910 (2000). This case implicates important double jeopardy principles. I would grant leave to consider: (1) whether the rule of reasonableness should control; see People v. Rand, 397 Mich 638, 642 (1976), mod on other grounds 399 Mich 1040 (1977); (2) whether a verdict is final before a court clerk records it; (3) when "departure" of the jury occurs: Does it occur when a jury leaves the courtroom or when it leaves the trial court's control? and (4) which controls: a written or spoken verdict?