If the jury advises the court that it has reached an impasse in its deliberations, the court may, in the parties’ presence, ask the jury to determine whether and how the court and counsel can assist the jury’s deliberations. After receiving the jurors’ response, if any, the court may direct further proceedings as appropriate.
Ariz. R. Crim. P. 22.4
COMMENT
Rule 22.4. Many juries, after reporting to the judge that they have reached an impasse in their deliberations, are needlessly discharged and a mistrial declared even though it might be appropriate and helpful for the judge to offer some assistance in hopes of improving the chances of a verdict. The judge’s offer would be designed and intended to address the issues that divide the jurors, if it is legally and practically possible to do so. The invitation to dialogue should not be coercive, suggestive, or unduly intrusive.
The judge’s response to the jurors’ report of impasse could take the following form:
This is offered to help you, not to force you to reach a verdict.
As jurors, you have a duty to discuss the case with one another and to deliberate in an effort to reach a just verdict. Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but only after you consider the evidence impartially with your fellow jurors. During your deliberations, you should not hesitate to re-examine your own views and change your opinion if you become convinced that it is wrong. However, you should not change your belief concerning the weight or effect of the evidence solely because of the opinions of your fellow jurors, or for the mere purpose of returning a verdict.
You may wish to identify areas of agreement and disagreement and then discuss the law and the evidence as they relate to the areas of disagreement.
If you still disagree, you may wish to tell the attorneys and me which issues, questions, law or facts you would like us to assist you with. If you decide to follow these steps, please write down the issues where further assistance might help bring about a verdict and give the note to the bailiff. The attorneys and I will then discuss your note and try to help you.
I do not wish to or intend to force a verdict. We are merely trying to be responsive to your apparent need for help. If it is possible that you could reach a verdict as a result of this procedure, you should consider doing so.
Please take a few minutes and discuss the instruction among yourselves. Then advise me in writing of whether we can attempt to assist you in the manner indicated above or whether you do not believe that such assistance and additional deliberation would assist you in reaching a verdict.
RAJI (CRIMINAL) 3D, Standard Criminal 42 (Supp. 2010).
If the jury identifies one or more issues that divide them, the court, with the help of the attorneys, can decide whether and how the issues can be addressed. Among the obvious options are the following: giving additional instructions; clarifying earlier instructions; directing the attorneys to make additional closing argument; reopening the evidence for limited purposes; or a combination of these measures. Of course, the court might decide that it is not legally or practically possible to respond to the jury’s concerns.
HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES
Former Rule 22.4, relating to assisting jurors at impasse, was abrogated effective January 1, 2018.