California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Santamaria, 229 Cal.App.3d 269, 280 Cal.Rptr. 43 (Cal. App. 1991):
Another factor influencing our assessment of the court's action is the existence of an alternative to suspending deliberations. The trial court here might have utilized the procedure set forth in section 1053, which authorizes the substitution of one judge for another under certain circumstances in criminal cases. 5 (See People v. Duke (1969) 276 Cal.App.2d 630, 634-635, 81 Cal.Rptr. 69; People v. Lichenstein (1913) 22 Cal.App. 592, 609-614, 135 P. 692.) Although the prosecutor suggested a substituted judge and the record before us indicates that appellant did not object to the suggestion, the record is absolutely silent about the court's reasons for rejecting the section 1053 procedure. 6
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.