A casual greeting and a hug inside a Williams County courtroom became the center of a state Supreme Court appeal this week. The North Dakota Supreme Court has upheld the conviction of Joshua Brock Martinez, ruling that a trial judge acted correctly by removing a juror who appeared too friendly with the defendant’s family.
Martinez was convicted in January 2025 on multiple serious charges, including two counts of attempted murder and reckless endangerment. However, he appealed the decision, arguing that his rights were violated when the District Court replaced a seated juror with an alternate early in the trial.
READ: Georgia CEO Handed 8-Year Sentence For Bribing Honduran Officials To Win Uniform Contracts
The controversy started on the second day of the seven-day trial. Prosecutors alerted the judge that they had seen “Juror 9” greeting, talking to, and hugging a man in the gallery. That man turned out to be Jacob Martinez, the defendant’s cousin who is described as being like a brother to him. The trial judge noted he had also seen the juror acting “chummy” with the spectator.
When questioned by the court, the juror admitted he knew Jacob Martinez from work but claimed he didn’t realize Jacob was related to the defendant until he approached him in the courtroom. While the juror insisted he could remain impartial, the judge decided not to take the risk. Calling it a “close call,” the judge dismissed Juror 9 and replaced him with one of the two alternates who had been present for the testimony.
On appeal, Martinez argued that swapping out a sworn juror violated the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Constitution. He claimed that once the jury was sworn in, he had a right to that specific tribunal.
READ: Florida Trooper Smashes Window To Reach Unresponsive Riverview Woman After Medical Emergency On I-75
The Supreme Court disagreed. In an opinion authored by Justice Bahr, the high court ruled that replacing a juror with a qualified alternate who has heard all the evidence does not trigger double jeopardy. The justices found that the trial court did not abuse its discretion, noting the valid concern regarding the juror’s personal connection to the defendant’s family.
Because the alternate juror had undergone the same selection process and was present for the entire trial, the court affirmed that Martinez received a fair trial. The criminal judgments against him stand.
Please make a small donation to the Tampa Free Press to help sustain independent journalism. Your contribution enables us to continue delivering high-quality, local, and national news coverage.
Sign up: Subscribe to our free newsletter for a curated selection of top stories delivered straight to your inbox.
