McAlister

People v. McAlister

Bad Law
167 Cal. App. 3d 633·1985 Cal. App. LEXIS 1968·213 Cal. Rptr. 271
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 30, 1985E000342California2,753 words

Opinion

Opinion

Morris, J.

Defendant was convicted by a jury of (1) vehicular manslaughter without gross negligence (former Pen. Code, § 192, subd. 3(b), now § 192, subd. (c)(4); Veh. Code, § 21755); (2) driving under the influence of alcohol with injury (Veh. Code, § 23153, subd. (a)); and (3) driving with blood alcohol level of . 10 percent or greater with injury (Veh. Code, § 23153, subd. (b)).

Defendant was sentenced to state prison for two years, the midterm, on count 2, as the base term, and to a concurrent one-year county jail sentence on count 1. The two-year concurrent sentence on count 3 was stayed, the stay to become permanent upon completion of the sentence on count 2.

Defendant has appealed.

The sole issue raised on appeal is whether the trial court committed prejudicial error in permitting jurors to directly question defense witnesses. We conclude that the error was not prejudicial.

The Facts

The facts and testimony necessary to an understanding of the possible impact of the jurors’ direct interrogation of witnesses were as follows:

The accident giving rise to the charges occurred on Cajon Boulevard near its intersection with Short Street in San Bernardino County. Cajon…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.