P.2d 1128, 1131 (Alaska App.1995). See generally, Stephen A. Saltzburg et al., Federal Rules of Evidence Manual (7th ed.1998), Vol. 2, pp. 899-906 (discussing Federal Evidence Rule 606(b), which is essentially the same as Alaska Evidence Rule 606(b)). . Evidence Rule 606(b) prohibits a court from examining jurors “as to any matter or statement occurring during the course of the jury’s deliberations^] or [as] to the effect of any matter .or statement upon [a] juror’s mind or emotions as influencing the juror to assent to or dissent from the verdict”. The rule also prohibits a court from receiving testimony from third parties (here, Kailuk-iak’s attorney) “concerning any matter about which [a] juror would be precluded from testifying”. See Meyer v. State, 627 P.2d 636, 638 (Alaska 1981) (<HOLDING>). Jurors can be questioned concerning outside
holding that the trial court properly refused to consider juror affidavits describing purported irregularities in the deliberative process when there was no allegation of extraneous influence on the jury holding that district court properly refused to rely on affidavits to the extent that they contained only legal conclusions holding that the trial court properly refused to consider allegations in the amended complaints that were disallowed holding that the trial court properly refused to consider allegations in the disallowed amended complaints holding that when the trial court proceeded to consider affidavits submitted with motion to reconsider summary judgment the affidavits were properly before the appellate court for purposes of reviewing the propriety of the trial courts grant of summary judgment