jury was not concurred in by each of the jurors, and, this being true, there was no legal verdict.” Indeed, when a poll of the jury discloses that the jury was not a unanimous verdict, the proper procedure is for “the trial court to return the jury to the jury room for further deliberations in an effort to arrive at a unanimous verdict.” And it is not “incumbent upon counsel to move the court for further deliberations.” Following the verdict in th 2d 631) (2004) (punctuation omitted); accord Maddox v. State, 233 Ga. 874, 876 (2) (213 SE2d 654) (1975). 20 Benefield, 278 Ga. at 466. 21 Id. (punctuation omitted); accord Ponder v. State, 11 Ga. App. 60, 61 (74 SE 715) (1912). 22 Benefield, 278 Ga. at 465. 23 Id. at 466. 24 See Wesby v. State, 300 Ga. App. 597, 600 (3) (685 SE2d 495) (2009)
recognizing that verdict must be affirmed by jury in open court to have force and validity holding that upon objection to the form of the verdict trial court did not err in returning jury for further deliberations holding that trial court was not required to instruct the jury to continue deliberations because despite jurors initial indication that the verdict was not hers she unequivocally affirmed the verdict in response to additional questions holding that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in declining to instruct the jury regarding a partial verdict where the judges examination of the tentative verdict sheets revealed no indication of jury unanimity holding that a courts response given without consulting counsel was not improper because it did not instruct as to the law but merely directed and encouraged the jurors to continue deliberations