Can a defendant who had been cross-examining a prosecution expert refuse to resume cross-examination and say he would remain silent for the rest of the trial?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Fitzpatrick, 66 Cal.App.4th 86, 77 Cal.Rptr.2d 634 (Cal. App. 1998):
In People v. Clark the pro se defendant, who had been cross-examining a prosecution expert witness, refused to resume cross-examination and said he would remain mute for the rest of the trial. The court revoked his pro se status and had standby counsel resume the cross-examination for the remainder of the day. The next day, defendant having had a change of heart, the court reinstated his pro se status.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
In what circumstances would a defendant have been denied a continuance of his trial on the grounds that the trial would have been more favorable to him? (California, United States of America)
When a defendant makes a mid-trial motion to revoke his self represented status and have standby counsel appointed for the remainder of the trial, does the trial court have a duty to manage the trial? (California, United States of America)
Is a defendant's claim that the trial court's failure to provide him with the means and subpoena witnesses to defend at trial a violation of his Sixth Amendment right to represent himself at trial reversible? (California, United States of America)
Can a defendant bring a motion for habeas corpus relief if he is denied access to cross-examining a prosecution expert at the "mental state" phase of his trial? (California, United States of America)
Does Defendant have a claim that the prosecution reduced the burden of proving a defendant's guilt by failing to instruct the jury that refusal was insufficient to establish guilt? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for a defendant's claim that he was denied his constitutional right to due process of law because the trial court relieved the prosecution of its burden of establishing that defendant acted with malice? (California, United States of America)
Does the Defendant's refusal to allow a tape recorder to be recorded during an interview constitute an invocation of his right to remain silent? (California, United States of America)
When a defendant waives his right to be present at trial by refusing to leave the courtroom, does he have a right to remain in the courtroom? (California, United States of America)
Does a deputy district attorney acquiesce in having the motion heard during the trial of a defendant before trial, rather than prior to trial? (California, United States of America)
If a suspect waives his Miranda right to remain silent during an interrogation, can the suspect remain silent? (California, United States of America)
