The People v. Sam CA3

DISCUSSION

I The Court Was Within Its Discretion To Deny Defendant’s Request To Excuse Juror No. 8 Defendant contends the trial court erred in failing to excuse Juror No. 8. He argues the juror committed misconduct because she intentionally concealed that she had been a child molest victim; the trial court erred in failing to apply the presumption of prejudice that arises when such misconduct comes to light; and the judgment must be reversed because the People cannot rebut the presumption of prejudice that arises from the misconduct. As we explain, defendant has forfeited the issue of whether Juror No. 8 intentionally concealed the information, and the trial court acted within its discretion in concluding she was not biased.

3 A Facts Behind Defendant’s Request To Remove Juror No. 8 Each prospective juror filled out a questionnaire that asked about qualifications to sit on this case. Question 27 asked the following: “Everyone has some biases, prejudices or preconceived ideas. Do you believe you have any which would interfere with your ability to fairly decide this case?” Juror No. 8 checked “yes” and in the lines asking, “If yes, please explain,” Juror No. 8 wrote, “I have known…