Reiser

DISCUSSION

I. On appeal, Reiser does not deny that he killed his wife and was convicted of her murder or that his children were very young when he committed the murder. Nonetheless, he raises many issues as to why the children’s civil trial against him for damages was unfair. He contends he was denied a fair trial in violation of his constitutional due process rights based on trial court error in failing to appoint him counsel below; failing to appoint him a defense investigator; and denying him the right to subpoena or call witnesses, resulting in what he says was a one-sided trial. He also complains that he was denied an “audio record” of the trial proceedings. He also raises issues concerning the jury, contending the court wrongfully excluded a potential juror who had worked with abused children, and that some of the jurors who served were exposed to news accounts and information not in evidence. He challenges the award of punitive damages on several grounds. He argues that the punitive damages award was unsupported by sufficient evidence of his ability to pay (see generally Adams v. Murakami (1991) 54 Cal.3d 105); the jury instructions on punitive damages were inadequate; and…