With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". denied defendant’s motion for mistrial and the trial court, therefore, would err by continuing to the sentencing proceeding with either an alternate juror or with a newly empaneled sentencing jury. The trial court ultimately seated an alternate juror for the capital sentencing proceeding. Defendant contends that the post-verdict removal of juror eleven for juror misconduct committed during the guilt-innocence phase deliberations violated his right under the North Carolina Constitution to trial by a jury composed of twelve qualified jurors. We agree. Article I, Section 24 of the North Carolina Constitution, which guarantees the right to trial by jury, contemplates no more or no less than a jury of twelve persons. See State v. Bindyke, 288 N.C. 608, 623, 220 S.E.2d 521, 531 (1975) (<HOLDING>); State v. Hudson, 280 N.C. 74, 79, 185 S.E.2d

A: holding that failure to list a beginning date of a pay period on a pay stub was not a violation of section 226a6 when the employer provided an electronic wage statement that did include the beginning date of the pay period
B: holding that an alternates presence in the jury room for a brief period at the beginning of jury deliberations was a violation of this constitutional right
C: holding that there is both a statutory and a constitutional right to a jury trial under erisa because congress lacks constitutional authority to limit right to a jury
D: holding batson claim untimely because it was not made before the jury or the last juror including the alternates is sworn but remanding for new trial in interests of justice
B.