What is the impact of a jury's deliberation on the length of deliberations?

prosecution's case. The only thing reflected by the length of deliberations here is that the jury took its time to reach a verdict in a case with significant ramifications. Consistent with making a careful decision, "we assume that the jury spent time going over their instructions to make sure that they were properly carrying out their duties." (People v. Walker (1995) 31 Cal.App.4th 432, 438.) "[W]e find that the length of the deliberations could as easily be reconciled with the jury's conscientious performance of its civic duty, rather than its difficulty in reaching a decision." (Id. at p. 439.) The jury approached its task with care, requesting a rereading of certain testimony and an examination of the video from the market. None of this suggests the case was anything other than what it appears to bea prosecution supported by overwhelming evidence of guilt.

Defendant contends the cumulative prejudicial effect of the various trial errors he has raised on appeal requires the reversal of his conviction. The few errors we have identified are clearly harmless in the face of the overwhelming evidence of defendant's guilt. Defendant's trial was not fundamentally unfair. (See People v. Jenkins (2000) 22 Cal.4th 900, 1056.)

Page 20

The judgment is affirmed.