Jenkins v. United States

holding that charge that said "[y]ou have got to reach a decision in this case" was coercive | holding that instructing a deadlocked jury that, “[y]ou have got to reach a decision in this case,” was coercive and constituted reversible error | holding that charge that said "[y]ou have got to reach a decision in this case” was coercive | holding that instructing a deadlocked jury that, “[y]ou have got to reach a decision in this case,” was coercive and constituted reversible error | recognizing that entire trial record “in its context and under all the circumstances of th[e] case” must be reviewed to determine if trial judge’s statements, questions, and instructions amounted to coercion | holding an Allen charge was unduly coercive when the trial judge said to the jury, “[y]ou have got to reach a decision in this case” | observing that when a defendant challenges a trial justice’s Allen charge, the Court must consider the particular facts and circumstances of the case | noting that state court's instruction ". . . a decision has to be reached by a jury. You are that jury," was coercive | holding that the trial court’s statement, in response to the jury’s note regarding its inability to reach a verdict, that “You have got to reach a decision in this case[,]” was coercive, and reversing the defendant’s conviction and remanding for a new trial | Telling the jurors that they “have got to reach a decision in this case” is coercive. | reviewing Allen charge “in its context and under all the circumstances of this case” to determine if charge was coercive | reversing where the trial judge told the jury, "You have got to reach a verdict" | reversing and remanding the case for a new trial because the charge told the jury "[y]ou have got to reach a decision in this case." | finding coercive the trial judge’ statement, “You have got to reach a decision in this case” | reversing and remanding case for a new trial because the charge told the jury "[y]ou have got to reach a decision in this case" | finding court’s statement, “You have got to reach a decision in this case,” unduly coercive | Dicta that an instruction is coercive if “it gave the jury the impression they must reach a verdict” | jury coerced when told, after reporting deadlock, that “[y]ou have got to reach a decision in this case” | where jury indicated doubts on sufficiency of evidence, it was coercive for judge to instruct: “You have got to reach a decision in this case.” | determinative question is "whether in its context and under all the circumstances of this case the statement was coercive" | error where judge stated to jury “[y]ou have got to reach a decision in this case” | determinative question is “whether in its context and under all the circumstances of this case the statement was coercive” | new trial required where judge instructed jurors, "You have got to reach a decision in this case" | error where judge stated to jury, “[y]ou have got to reach a decision in this case” | trial court’s exhortation to jury that “[y]ou have got to reach a decision in this case” was coercive | judge’s statement in response to deadlocked jury that the jurors “have got to reach a decision in this case" was unduly coercive | examine content, length of deliberations following instruction, total time of delibera- tions, and indicia of coercion | look to content, length of deliberations follow- ing instruction, total time of deliberations, and indicia of coercion | judge’s statement, “You have got to reach a decision in this case,” held coercive | “A charge that strays too far from the charge approved in Allen will rise to the level of a constitutional violation only if ‘in its context and under all the circumstances, [the charge] . . . was coercive.’” | "You have got to reach a decision in this case." | citingEscamillav. State, 143 S.W.3d 814, 828 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) | per No. 19-3245 7 curiam | per No. 19-3245 7 curiam | per No. 19-3245 7 curiam