People v. Melendez CA4/3

DISCUSSION

I.

SECTION 231.

Melendez contends the trial court erred in permitting the prosecutor to exercise a peremptory challenge to Prospective Juror Number 145 (PJ145) over his section 231.7 objection. A. Relevant Facts During voir dire, when defense counsel was questioning prospective jurors, PJ145 stated he was a retired attorney who practiced probate law. Defense counsel later asked the entire group of prospective jurors whether anyone would believe Melendez committed the current alleged crimes based on his past acts. PJ145 stated he would not because “what happened today and what happened the day after has nothing to do with it.” Later, the prosecutor asked the prospective jurors whether a single witness can prove a case, and PJ145 shook his head in disagreement. The prosecutor noted PJ145’s disagreement, and posed a hypothetical about whether a robber should be prosecuted if he robbed PJ145 and there were no other witness to the robbery. PJ145 responded that it would be inappropriate to not prosecute the robber. During an unrecorded portion of the prosecutor’s questioning, PJ145 revealed he was a criminal defense attorney. Subsequently, the prosecutor used his first…