California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. McAlister, 167 Cal.App.3d 633, 213 Cal.Rptr. 271 (Cal. App. 1985):
The rationale of these cases is that a juror is not selected for the purpose of asking questions and is not expected to take the place of counsel in the trial of the case. Therefore, when the court permits a juror to propound questions to a witness, the juror, to some extent at least, represents the court. It is therefore the duty of the court to see to it, without objection being made, that no improper questions are asked of a witness by a juror. (Sparks v. Daniels (Mo.App.1961) 343 S.W.2d 661, 667.)
Our examination of cases from other jurisdictions reveals that direct juror questioning
Page 277
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.