Carlton Richard Nebergall v. Florida

Did the trial court violate Petitioner’s constitutional right to a fair and impartial jury by creating a substantial risk that one or more jurors felt pressured or coerced into abandoning their position by ordering Petitioner’s deadlocked jury to continue deliberations after the jury, in spite of the court’s instructions to the contrary, disclosed a numerical split, at the same time as the World Health Organization announced Covid-19 as a Global Pandemic and Florida’s Governor issued a State Health Emergency; without the court ever inquiring whether the jury had concerns with continuing to deliberate? Is a prosecutor’s comments in closing arguments, inferring to the jury that it was improper for a defendant to view pretrial discovery with his attorney, as a basis for the jury to discredit the defendant’s testimony, sufficiently egregious to result in denying Petitioner’s due process rights to a fair trial?