Last week, Colorado’s second-highest court overturned a man’s sexual assault convictions because a Douglas County judge allowed a biased jury to sit.

Jurors convicted Dennis Floyd Ladd of multiple sex crimes in 2022 and he received an indefinite sentence of at least 25 years. During jury selection, his attorney asked the jury if Ladd would be charged if he decided to exercise his constitutional right not to testify.

One person said it “seems really questionable” whether Ladd remained silent. Another juror, identified as Juror T, acknowledged that he was not allowed to infer Ladd’s guilt if Ladd did not tell his side of the story.

However, “I think if I were to lean one way or another, I wouldn’t be neutral,” continued Juror T. “You know, there’s a little…it would create a little gray area for me.”

“When you say gray area, do you mean an inference of guilt?” the defense attorney asked.

“Yes,” said Juror T. He explained that if he caught his two children fighting in the living room and only one told him what had happened, he would “lean” toward the child who testified.

The defense attempted to dismiss Juror T for cause, pointing to the man’s indication that he would use Ladd’s silence against him. The prosecution objected, claiming there was “no follow-up” on Juror T’s ability to follow the law.

In her ruling, District Court Judge Theresa Slade appeared to confuse Juror T with other jurors before refusing to excuse him. Juror T ended up serving on Ladd’s jury.

A three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals later agreed with Ladd that Juror T’s answers suggested he could not follow the law as instructed.

“Juror T agreed clearly and directly when asked whether he would use Ladd’s silence against him by inferring guilt from Ladd’s decision not to testify,” Judge Stephanie Dunn wrote. in the opinion of October 24. “And because neither the prosecutor nor the court asked clarifying questions on this point, Juror T never assured the court that it could set aside its clearly expressed views and apply the law as instructed.”

The panel ordered a new trial. Although Ladd claimed that a second jury was also biased, the Court of Appeals did not address that claim.

the case is The people against Ladd.