In an extremely detailed opinion, the court holds that CCP 203 renders ineligible only sex offenders required to register under Penal Code 290, not those required to register under adjacent sections of the same Penal Code article. The Legislature could reasonably choose not to render ineligible those required to register under the adjacent sections due to the difficulty of determining to whom they applied. The opinion affirms a finding of misconduct by a juror who failed to disclose his involvement in prior litigation but determined de novo (since CCP 660’s time limits barred remand for redetermination by the trial court) that the misconduct was not prejudicial. It didn’t reflect bias for or against any party or relate to any issue in the case or make it difficult for the juror to credit any witness. Also, though not in itself determinative, the verdict was 11-1.