Reasonable Doubts - Nov 3, 2010
Homicide - insufficiency of evidence defendant shook baby to death
Smith v. Mitchell (04-55831, 9th Cir., 10/29/10) F.3d
On remand for second time from U.S. Supreme Court, Ninth Circuit reiterates grant of habeas on the grounds that no reasonable juror could have found defendant could have shaken her grandchild to death.
Jurors - denial of challenges for cause
People v. Baldwin (B217438, Second Dist., 11/2/10) Cal.App.4th
Denial of challenges for cause against jurors who did not serve because they were challenged peremptorily did not require reversal. Follows People v. Yeoman (2003) 31 Cal.4th 93, which holds question does not need to be examined because defendant could not show prejudice, as none of the challenged jurors sat. Court notes that Yeoman seems to conflict with an earlier case, People v. Bittaker (1989) 48 Cal.3d 1046, which is not even mentioned in Yeoman.
Jury selection - Batson Wheeler error
People v. Long (H033197, Sixth Dist., 10/29/10) Cal.App.4th
Case reversed because prosecutor failed to provide reasons for excluding a Vietnamese juror, where defendant (and victim) were Vietnamese. Prosecutor made vague reference to "body language" without describing it in any way, and court accepted it. "To credit such a general utterance would nullify the principle of law and would constitute the functional equivalent of 'take my word for it,' with the trial judge saying, 'Yes, I will.' Where a nonverifiable utterance is made sufficient to satisfy a principle of law, the principle is usually lost."
Note: this is a Rushing, J. opinion. He does not mince words.
Search & seizure - probable cause for traffic stop
People v. Greenwood (B220315, Second Dist., 10/28/10) Cal.App.4th
Report from DMV that car's registration was not current, without any mention of a valid temporary permit (which was affixed to the rear window) justified stop of car (which led to discovery of PCP cigarette). Distinguishes People v. Hernandez (2008) 45 Cal.4th 295.
Speedy trial - 10 day grace period does not apply to objecting defendant when codefendant requests extension
Smith v. Superior Court (A124763, First Dist., 10/28/10) Cal.App.4th
On remand from CA Supreme Court to reconsider in light of People v. Sutton (2010) 48 Cal.4th 533, court of appeal affirms grant of dismissal on speedy trial grounds. Ten-day grace period provided by Penal Code section 1382(a)(2)(B) does not automatically apply to an objecting defendant whose codefendant requested a continuance.
