Appellate court hears argument that juror’s hearing and memory raise fair-trial concerns in Alonzo Hoskins case

Autumn Bowling, attorney for appellant petitioner Alonzo Hoskins, told a panel of judges at a post‑conviction hearing that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to renew a request to question juror number 9 after she raised hearing concerns during Hoskins’ 2019 trial.

“Mr. Hoskins comes before this court having been found guilty by 11 jurors of the murder of Jack McFaul,” Bowling said, and she told the court the post‑conviction record shows the juror later testified she believed she had convicted a different defendant at a different trial.

The claim at issue is whether trial counsel was deficient for not bringing juror number 9 back into court for questioning or otherwise investigating her ability to hear, and whether any deficiency prejudiced Hoskins’ right to a fair trial. Bowling argued the post‑conviction inquiry and other facts — including that the juror obtained hearing aids about three years after the trial and that the juror told the post‑conviction court she recalled…