If defendant fails to establish all the errors of the trial court as a cumulative result of the cumulative error, can he continue to argue that the cumulative effect of the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt and mandates reversal?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. SMITH, E048186, No. RIF128500 (Cal. App. 2010):

10. Defendant raises one additional claim that the cumulative error denied him his due process right to a fair trial but he does not support the claim with anything other than the cursory and conclusionary statement that "the cumulative effect of the errors noted above was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt and mandates reversal." Our conclusions, set out above, that the trial court did not commit any of the errors about which defendant complains in this appeal easily disposes of this issue. But even if defendant had established all the errors he claims occurred in the trial court, we nevertheless would reject this claim because defendant has not supported it with the required discussion. "Issues do not have a life of their own: if they are not raised or supported by [substantive] argument or citation to authority, we consider the issues waived." (Jones v. Superior Court (1994) 26 Cal.App.4th 92, 99.)

Other Questions


Does a trial court error of inadequately warning a defendant of the pitfalls and hazards involved in self-representation constitute harmless beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
Does a competent, unconflicted counsel who submitted on the evidence at the preliminary hearing, should have argued to the trial court that this evidence did not establish the lawful duty element beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
Is the error in failing to suppress a defendant's extrajudicial statements made without a proper Miranda admonition harmless beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
If a defendant's request for reappointment of counsel for a preliminary hearing was rejected immediately before the preliminary hearing commenced, is such error harmless even under the beyond-the-reasonable doubt standard? (California, United States of America)
Does a defendant have any grounds to argue that the trial court erred in failing to give the cautionary instruction at the end of trial? (California, United States of America)
Does the absence of an instruction defining reasonable doubt result in a jury failing to apply the same reasonable doubt test? (California, United States of America)
Does Defendant have a claim that the trial court should have instructed the jury that it could impose the death penalty only if it found beyond a reasonable doubt that death is appropriate? (California, United States of America)
Is a defendant's contention that an error in judgment is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
How have the Attorney General argued that the Court of Appeal invited error in giving instructions on application of the reasonable doubt principle to a lesser included homicide defendant? (California, United States of America)
Does the Attorney General's error in admitting evidence of a defendant's inconsistent testimony in the prosecution's case in chief, rather than for impeachment purposes, be harmless beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
X



Whitelogo nobg 300dpi sm


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."


Trusted by top litigators from across North America.