Dyer

People v. Dyer

Good Law
10 Cal. Rptr. 613·188 Cal. App. 2d 646·1961 Cal. App. LEXIS 2466
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 30, 1961Crim. No. 3709California959 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Duniway, J.

Dyer appeals from a judgment of conviction. The offense is selling heroin (Health & Saf. Code, § 11500). Through court-appointed counsel, he urges that he did not validly consent to the absence of a juror or to have his ease decided by a jury of 11 persons.

No claim is made that the evidence does not support the verdict. We have examined the transcript and find the evidence more than sufficient.

The question arises in this way: The presentation of evidence and the argument of counsel were substantially completed on Friday afternoon. The court remarked that he did not “want to impose upon the jury by instructing them at this late hour on Friday,” and that “intervening engagements [of one of counsel] preclude doing so on Monday,” *648 and suggested that the court reconvene at 9 a. m. on Tuesday. A juror said that he could attend on Monday, but it would be difficult on Tuesday, although he could do so “if it is going to inconvenience everybody else.” He was going on his vacation, leaving for Hawaii, on Tuesday. After a little further discussion, the court indicated that it would proceed on Tuesday, and concluded by saying, 1 ‘ The only other possible thing that can be done is that…

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.