Whether a district court must determine that there is no possibility that allegations of juror misconduct stem from the juror's view of the evidence to remove the juror

QUESTION PRESENTED Federal criminal defendants may be convicted only by unanimous juries. That unanimity may not be achieved by removing a holdout juror because of how he views a case. This Court has not had occasion to consider the standard by which district courts should determine whether to dismiss a juror during deliberations when complaints of misconduct might stem from that juror’s view of the evidence. Three circuits apply what the government acknowledged below to be a “stricter,” “heightened standard,” and allow juror removal only if there is “no possibility’ that complaints about a juror arise from his view of the evidence. Three other circuits, including the Third Circuit, allow juror removal so long as a district court deems that possibility not to be “reasonable.” The question presented is: Whether, to remove a juror for alleged misconduct during deliberations, a district court must determine that there is no possibility that the allegations of misconduct stem from the juror’s view of the evidence. @)