Is there any case law where a jury member at a jury trial was found unfit and biased because they shared a view that if a person had consumed alcohol they should not pick up a firearm?

Martirosyan claims the jurors were unfit and biased because they shared the view that "if a person had consumed alcohol they should not pick up a firearm." But such a view is not necessarily evidence of bias or unfitness. Nor is it the equivalent of a prejudgment of the defendant's guilt on the charged offense. (People v. Pride (1992) 3 Cal.4th 195, 229.) It only shows that in responding to a general hypothetical, and relying on commonsense, prospective jurors felt the combination of alcohol and weapons was dangerous.

Moreover, as the Attorney General notes, a personal belief about using firearms while intoxicated does not mean jurors would disobey instructions on a different issue, a defendant's right of self-defense. Martirosyan was not charged with using a firearm while intoxicated. Nor has he shown that any of the trial jurors felt they would be hindered in their ability to follow instructions on self-defense because of their personal views about intoxication and firearms. (People v. Pride, supra, 3 Cal.4th at p. 229 [denial of challenge for cause upheld where trial court found jurors who prejudged defendant's guilt from media reports would put aside those opinions and follow its instructions].)