California Criminal Lawyer Blog

RECORDING JURY INSTRUCTIONS; CUSTODY FOR POSSESSION; REOPENING JURY
SELECTION

The judge got the parties to stipulate that the court reporter didn't have to write down the jury instructions. It turned out that there were all sorts of problems with the instructions the jury was actually given.

The Court of Appeal makes it pretty clear that they want jury instructions reported. So when your judge pressures you to stipulate, note this case.

Of course, the Court of Appeal finds no actual error here, even with the DA not available (he's a judge now) and defense counsel not recalling lots of stuff.

Here's the second issue. The defendant ran over and killed the victim while the defendant was stealing the victim's son's car. Did the victim have sufficient actual or constructive possession over the car to qualify as a victim of a robbery?

The Court of Appealsays yes, saying, get this, that the victim need only have "loose custody" over the property, and the victim's connection to the car was sufficient here. Love that loose
custody.

And there's yet a third issue.Third issue. Both sides passed on the exercise of peremptory challenges. The court then reopened jury selection and permitted the DA to use a peremptory challenge. This Court of Appeal says that a court can reopen jury selection on finding good cause, and that good cause should be liberally construed and of course here that means the Court of Appeal upholds the reopening.

People v. DeFrance; 2008 DJ DAR 15595; DJ, 10/10/08; C/A 3rd