Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
7 California opinions name it 3 courts 1991–2026 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Weathertongreen2 sentences2026(See People v. Weatherton (2014) 59 Cal.4th 589, 600 [“It is for the prosecutor to rebut the presumption” of prejudice arising from juror misconduct].) In support of his claim, appellant cites page 6617 of volume 23 of the reporter’s transcript. 2019Once a court determines a juror has engaged in misconduct, a *230 defendant is presumed to have suffered prejudice. [Citation.] It is for the prosecutor to rebut the presumption." ( People v. Weatherton , supra , 59 Cal.4th at p. 600 , 174 Cal.Rptr.3d 45 , 328 P.3d 38 .) Jury misconduct "may be rebutted by an affirmative evidentiary showing that prejudice does not exist or by a reviewing court's examination of the entire record to determine whether there is a reasonable probability of actual harm resulting from the misconduct. [Citations.]" ( People v. Lavender , supra, 60 Cal.4th at p. 687 , | 1 | 3 |
People v. Lavendergreen2 sentences2019Once a court determines a juror has engaged in misconduct, a *230 defendant is presumed to have suffered prejudice. [Citation.] It is for the prosecutor to rebut the presumption." ( People v. Weatherton , supra , 59 Cal.4th at p. 600 , 174 Cal.Rptr.3d 45 , 328 P.3d 38 .) Jury misconduct "may be rebutted by an affirmative evidentiary showing that prejudice does not exist or by a reviewing court's examination of the entire record to determine whether there is a reasonable probability of actual harm resulting from the misconduct. [Citations.]" ( People v. Lavender , supra, 60 Cal.4th at p. 687 , 2019Once a court determines a juror has engaged in misconduct, a *230 defendant is presumed to have suffered prejudice. [Citation.] It is for the prosecutor to rebut the presumption." ( People v. Weatherton , supra , 59 Cal.4th at p. 600 , 174 Cal.Rptr.3d 45 , 328 P.3d 38 .) Jury misconduct "may be rebutted by an affirmative evidentiary showing that prejudice does not exist or by a reviewing court's examination of the entire record to determine whether there is a reasonable probability of actual harm resulting from the misconduct. [Citations.]" ( People v. Lavender , supra, 60 Cal.4th at p. 687 , | 1 | 2 |
People v. Molanogreen1 sentence2025(See Scally, supra, 243 Cal.App.4th 285 ; see also Molano, supra, 7 Cal.5th 620 .) Section 1101 (b) evidence may be properly introduced by a prosecutor to rebut a defense. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Redmondgreen1 sentence2014(See People v. Redmond (1981) 29 Cal.3d 904, 911 [allowing the prosecutor to rebut defense evidence elicited negating defendant’s consciousness of guilt because defense counsel opened the door].) The court did not abuse its discretion in concluding the probative value of the evidence was not substantially outweighed by its prejudicial effect. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Scally CA4/3
green
2 sentences2025(See Scally, supra, 243 Cal.App.4th 285 ; see also Molano, supra, 7 Cal.5th 620 .) Section 1101 (b) evidence may be properly introduced by a prosecutor to rebut a defense. 2025(See Scally, supra, 243 Cal.App.4th 285 ; see also Molano, supra, 7 Cal.5th 620 .) Section 1101 (b) evidence may be properly introduced by a prosecutor to rebut a defense. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
In Re Hamilton
green
1 sentence2014(In re Hamilton, supra, 20 Cal.4th at p. 295 .) It is for the prosecutor to rebut the presumption by establishing there is “no substantial likelihood that one or more jurors were actually biased against the defendant.” (Id. at p. 296.) Whether P.P.’s “misconduct was prejudicial presents a mixed question of law and fact ‘ “subject to an appellate court’s independent determination.” ’ ” (Tafoya, supra, 42 Cal.4th at p. 192 .) Given the nature, scope, and frequency of P.P.’s misconduct, along with his repeated and admitted untruthfulness on a variety of topics, the People have not discharged thei | 1 | 2014–2014 |
People v. Quang Minh Tran
green
1 sentence2014(People v. Tran (2011) 51 Cal.4th 1040, 1047 .) The trial court limited the prosecutor to elicit Allen’s parole status in two narrow questions, which enabled the jury to infer other reasons for Allen’s cooperation. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
People v. Tafoya
green
1 sentence2014(In re Hamilton, supra, 20 Cal.4th at p. 295 .) It is for the prosecutor to rebut the presumption by establishing there is “no substantial likelihood that one or more jurors were actually biased against the defendant.” (Id. at p. 296.) Whether P.P.’s “misconduct was prejudicial presents a mixed question of law and fact ‘ “subject to an appellate court’s independent determination.” ’ ” (Tafoya, supra, 42 Cal.4th at p. 192 .) Given the nature, scope, and frequency of P.P.’s misconduct, along with his repeated and admitted untruthfulness on a variety of topics, the People have not discharged thei | 1 | 2014–2014 |
People v. Nesler
green
1 sentence2014Accordingly, “we must set aside the verdict, no matter how convinced we might be that an unbiased jury would have reached the same verdict, because a biased adjudicator is one of the few structural trial defects that compel reversal without application of a harmless error standard. [Citation.]” (Nesler, supra, 16 Cal.4th at p. 579 .) *601 III. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
People v. Werwee
green
1 sentence1991(In re Winchester, supra, 53 Cal.2d at pp. 534-535; People v. Werwee, supra, 112 Cal.App.2d at p. 496 .) At the same time, however, courts required a defendant to show prejudice from the separation of a jury during a continuance before submission, and would not reverse based only on speculation about detriment from the delay. | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.