California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Vieira, 106 P.3d 990, 25 Cal.Rptr.3d 337, 35 Cal.4th 264 (Cal. 2005):
Thus, the question is not, as defendant contends, whether his claim of Cash error was properly preserved, but rather whether any error was committed. Although asking the multiple-murder question in the jury questionnaire would not have been improper, refusal to include the question was not error so long as there was an opportunity to ask the question during voir dire. Because defendant did not attempt to have the trial court conduct a multiple murder inquiry during voir dire, and the
[25 Cal.Rptr.3d 353]
trial court was given no opportunity to rule on the propriety of that inquiry, we conclude defendant cannot claim error. (See Cash, supra, 28 Cal.4th at p. 722, 122 Cal.Rptr.2d 545, 50 P.3d 332; People v. Medina, supra, 11 Cal.4th at p. 746, 47 Cal.Rptr.2d 165, 906 P.2d 2.)[25 Cal.Rptr.3d 353]
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.