Pope

Pope v. Candelaria

Good Law
84 F. App'x 923
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 22, 2003No. 02-17038; D.C. No. CV-99-05445-DLBCalifornia564 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Appellant George Pope (“Pope” or “Petitioner”) was convicted by a jury in California state court of petty theft, misdemeanor battery, and resisting a police officer. Under that state’s Three Strikes Law, he was sentenced to life in prison. Pope alleges that he was denied his Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights to a fair trial when the judge made the following statement to the jury venire at the beginning of voir dire:

In district court, Respondent Candelaria agreed that this statement was made, but argued it was made not only with Pope’s consent but also at his specific request. 1 The record contains a declaration from the deputy district attorney who prosecuted the case, stating that there was an in-chambers discussion prior to trial at which Pope, both counsel, and the judge were present. Pope was allegedly concerned that there were members of the jury pool biased against African-Americans and thus indicated that he wished the judge to make the statement.

Pope’s habeas petition denies that he was ever a part of such a pre-trial conference and that his trial counsel told him that the judge was going to use the offensive racial epithet. He specifically denies…

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.