In Gonzales v. State, 3 S.W.3d 915, 917 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999), the Court addressed the issue of jurors withholding information during voir dire. The Court held that the defendant failed to show a juror had withheld information because defense counsel's questions had been inadequate. The Court said "defense counsel has an obligation to ask questions calculated to bring out that information which might be said to indicate a juror's inability to be impartial, truthful, and the like." Ibid. The Court emphasized that "counsel must ask specific questions, not rely on broad ones," and that "counsel must ask follow-up questions." Ibid. In Gonzales v. State, 3 S.W.3d 915 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999), the Court rejected the appellant's argument that one of the jurors had engaged in misconduct by making a false statement on a written juror questionnaire. In explaining why no error was presented by the juror's false statement, the Court stated: The Court have long insisted that counsel be diligent in eliciting pertinent information from prospective jurors during voir dire in an effort to uncover potential bias or prejudice: defense counsel has an obligation to ask questions calculated to bring out that information which might be said to indicate a juror's inability to be impartial, truthful, and the like. Unless defense counsel asks such questions, we must hold, as we do here, that the purportedly material information which a juror fails to disclose is not really 'withheld' so as to constitute misconduct which would warrant a reversal. Gonzales, 3 S.W.3d at 917