California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Bittaker, 259 Cal.Rptr. 630, 48 Cal.3d 1046, 774 P.2d 659 (Cal. 1989):
22 Our most recent decision to discuss limitation on voir dire was People v. Fuentes (1985) 40 Cal.3d 629, 221 Cal.Rptr. 440, 710 P.2d 240. Defense counsel sought to ask jurors whether they believed an accomplice who only aided and abetted a robbery, and did not intend to kill, should be punished as severely as the actual killer. We characterized the proposed questions as relevant to the felony-murder special circumstances, and held the trial court erred in excluding that area of inquiry. (At pp. 638-639, 221 Cal.Rptr. 440, 710 P.2d 240.) Because the special circumstance finding was reversed on other grounds, we did not reach the question of prejudice.
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.