through stipulation of counsel, capital defendant waived his right to voir dire every prospective juror individually and in sequestration
How later courts described this case
- through stipulation of counsel, capital defendant waived his right to voir dire every prospective juror individually and in sequestration
- “We rarely second-guess counsel’s cross-examination tactics, despite 9 the elicitation of seemingly damaging testimony.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
MOSK, J.
I concur in the judgment.
In addition, I generally concur in the opinion of the court. But, unlike my colleagues, I would “compare ‘[a] prosecutor’s treatment of minority and nonminority prospective jurors’ in reviewing the validity of . . . [peremptory] challenges” under People v. Wheeler (1978) 22 Cal.3d 258 [ 148 Cal.Rptr. 890 , 583 P.2d 748 ], and Batson v. Kentucky (1986) 476 U.S. 79 [ 106 S.Ct. 1712 , 90 L.Ed.2d 69 ]. (People v. Jackson (1996) 13 Cal.4th 1164, 1248-1249 [ 56 Cal.Rptr.2d 49 , 920 P.2d 1254 ] (conc. opn. of Mosk, J.).) Employing such an approach, I conclude that the peremptory challenges by the prosecutor here were not invalid.