Does a jury have to consider the fact that appellant refused to testify in a civil case?

was ultimately excused for cause and never became part of the final jury panel. The jury was also instructed with CALCRIM No. 355 which unequivocally stated that appellant had "an absolute constitutional right not to testify," and that the jury must not consider "for any reason at all, the fact that [appellant] did not testify." Juries are presumed to follow the trial court's instructions (People v. Coffman and Marlow (2004) 34 Cal.4th 1, 83), and nothing in the record indicates the jury did not do so.

We find no basis for reversal due to the trial court's comments.