Is a defendant's claim that the voir dire of prospective jurors "unfairly limited the amount of information that defense counsel received"?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. Roldan, 110 P.3d 289, 27 Cal.Rptr.3d 360, 35 Cal.4th 646 (Cal. 2005):

In a related claim, defendant contends the trial court's voir dire of prospective jurors "unfairly limited the amount of information that defense counsel received." As with the decision not to sequester the jurors, however, defendant failed to preserve this issue by objecting. (People v. Hernandez (2003) 30 Cal.4th 835, 855-856, 134 Cal.Rptr.2d 602, 69 P.3d 446.) Even assuming the issue were properly before us, defendant fails to explain what type of information was missing or how the detailed jury questionnaires and follow-up questions from the bench were inadequate. Accordingly, the claim is meritless.

Other Questions


Does Defendant have a valid claim to be able to claim damages from a defendant who has been found guilty of a similar claim against the Defendant? (California, United States of America)
Does the trial court erred by discussing some of defendant's complaints about defense counsel and disagreements with defense counsel in the presence of the prosecutor? (California, United States of America)
Is a prosecutor's comment that defense counsel was seeking to "distract the jury from the evidence as an attack on counsel's integrity a fair response to defense counsel's remarks? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for making a reasonable grounds for arrest within a police department by one officer transmitting information purportedly received from an informer to another officer who had not received such information? (California, United States of America)
Does a defendant have to meet with a juror to determine whether a defendant has made a sufficient showing of misconduct on a request to disclose juror information? (California, United States of America)
How have the courts dealt with Defendant's claim that defense counsel pressured defendant not to testify on his own behalf? (California, United States of America)
If a defendant's claim that defense counsel negligent in failing to request an other-crimes limiting instruction under CALJIC No.50 fails, what are the consequences? (California, United States of America)
Is a defendant's claim that his trial counsel's failure to object or request a limiting instruction was ineffective assistance of counsel? (California, United States of America)
Is a limitation on counsel's general voir dire limited preventing the defense from eliciting juror bias? (California, United States of America)
Does the delay in seeking juror information from the trial attorney's delay in obtaining the juror's information constitute inadequate assistance of counsel? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.