What is the test for a limitation on attorney questioning of prospective jurors at voir dire?

On the merits, the law at the time of trial provided that trial courts in criminal cases had the discretion to set "maximum" "time" limits for attorney questioning of prospective jurors.² (Former Code. Civ. Proc., 223 ["In a criminal case, . . . the court may specify the maximum amount of time that counsel for each party may question an individual juror, or may specify an aggregate amount of time for each party . . . ."]; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.201 [requiring court to "permit counsel to conduct supplemental questioning as provided in Code of Civil Procedure section 223"]; see generally People v. Edwards (1991) 54 Cal.3d 787, 830 [voir dire rulings reviewed for an abuse of discretion].) The law further provided that any abuse of discretion in setting those time limits "shall not cause any conviction to be reversed unless the exercise of that discretion has resulted in a miscarriage of justice." (Former Code Civ. Proc., 223.) In this context, a limitation on voir dire results in a miscarriage of

Page 11