Define: Sherman–Sorrells Doctrine

The Sherman–Sorrells Doctrine is a legal principle that allows a court to consider evidence of juror misconduct during deliberations in limited circumstances.

The Sherman–Sorrells Doctrine can be invoked when there is evidence of external influence on the jury, such as bribery, threats, or improper communication with jurors.

The purpose of the Sherman–Sorrells Doctrine is to ensure that the jury’s decision is not tainted by external factors and to maintain the integrity of the judicial process.

If the Sherman–Sorrells Doctrine is successfully invoked, it may result in a new trial being ordered, as the jury’s decision may be deemed unreliable due to the external influence.

To invoke the Sherman–Sorrells Doctrine, the party seeking a new trial must present clear and convincing evidence of juror misconduct or external influence.

No, the Sherman–Sorrells Doctrine can only be used to challenge a jury decision if there is evidence of juror misconduct or external influence. It cannot be used to challenge a jury’s decision based on the merits of the case.

If the Sherman–Sorrells Doctrine is successfully invoked, the court may order a new trial to ensure a fair and impartial jury decision.

Yes, the Sherman–Sorrells Doctrine has limitations. It cannot be used to challenge a jury’s decision based on the internal deliberations or thought processes of the jurors.

Yes, the Sherman–Sorrells Doctrine can be invoked after a verdict has been reached if new evidence of juror misconduct or external influence comes to light.

The Sherman–Sorrells Doctrine is recognized in some jurisdictions, but not all. Its applicability may vary depending on the specific jurisdiction’s laws and legal precedents.