| |
| | No. 98-3046 |
 | | Kiernan, 227 Wis.2d 736, 596 N.W.2d 760 (1999), the supreme court ruled that several jurors were objectively biased because they had rejected the same theory of defense tendered by the same defense attorney in a similar case completed several days earlier. |
 | | However, in the inverse situation where a juror is improperly removed (as opposed to retained), the supreme court has held that automatic reversal is not necessary because, even though the prospective juror was improperly dismissed, the defendant was not required to expend a peremptory strike against the challenged juror. |
 | | In the statutes, this is expressed as situations where a prospective juror "is related by blood or marriage to any party or to any attorney appearing in the case, or has any financial interest in the case." Section 805.08(1), Stats. |
| www.wisbar.org /res/capp/z1998/98-3046.htm (4905 words) |
|