People v. Alas
| Decision Date | 17 July 2002 |
| Docket Number | No. A092852.,A092852. |
| Citation | 122 Cal.Rptr.2d 467,100 Cal.App.4th 293 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Daniel ALAS, Defendant and Appellant. |
| Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Hilda Ellen Scheib, San Francisco, First District Appellate Project, for Appellant.
Office of Attorney General, Jill M. Thayer, San Francisco, Ryan B. McCarroll, Sacramento, for Respondent.
In this appeal from a final judgment of second degree murder, the chief issue before us is whether the trial court committed reversible error in finding misconduct by a petit juror and ordering him removed during the course of the jury's deliberations. Although the question is close, recent high court precedent compels us to conclude the evidence before the trial court was insufficient to establish juror misconduct as a "demonstrable reality," an essential finding under governing case law. Because of that insufficiency, the juror's removal was prejudicial error requiring reversal of the judgment. In addition, we conclude the double jeopardy provisions of the federal Constitution do not bar defendant's retrial. We will accordingly reverse the judgment of conviction and remand the cause for a new trial.
A jury found defendant guilty of second degree murder for the November 21, 1998, slaying of Anton Segal. Segal was killed on a raucous Saturday night outside the Roaring 20's, a strip club on Broadway Avenue in San Francisco's North Beach district. Because the only issue before us on this appeal relate to the question of alleged juror misconduct, we need not recite the facts underlying the prosecution in any detail. It is enough to note that defendant, accompanied by his brother, was angered after being barred entry into the club because they were carrying beer and appeared intoxicated. On the sidewalk outside, defendant became increasingly disruptive and, after a series of confrontations with club personnel and passersby, recovered a metal "car club" (a common antitheft device) from his van, returned to the sidewalk, and struck Mr. Segal on the head from behind, shattering his skull and killing him. Police arrested defendant within days of the killing.
Following the close of defendant's murder trial, the jury was instructed by the trial court and retired to deliberate. During the second day of deliberations, the foreperson sent the trial judge the following note: "`One of the jurors,'" the note stated, " " The trial judge announced his intention to speak to the foreperson outside the presence of the rest of the jurors. The following colloquy ensued.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Trotter, B149459.
... ... Hernandez (2002) 95 Cal.App.4th 1346, 116 Cal.Rptr.2d 379, review granted May 15, 2002 (S105271); People v. Smith (B133309), review granted June 19, 2002 (S106273); and People v. Du (B110122), review granted June 19, 2002 (SI06740); and a petition for review is pending in People v. Alas (2002) 100 Cal. App.4th 293, 122 Cal.Rptr.2d 467 ... 41. Compare Crist v. Bretz, supra, 437 U.S. 28, 35, 98 S.Ct. 2156, 57 L.Ed.2d 24; Curry v. Superior Court, supra, 2 Cal.3d 707, 712, 87 Cal.Rptr. 361, 470 P.2d 345 ... 42. Penal Code section 1089; see footnote 11, ante ... 43. See ... ...
-
People v. Valot
... ... Smith, review granted June 19, 2002, S106273 (finding jeopardy violation, over dissent); and People v. Du, review granted June 19, 2002, S106740 (finding jeopardy violation, over dissent), with People v. Alas (2002) 100 Cal.App.4th 293, 122 Cal.Rptr.2d 467, review granted October 2, 2002, S109356 (no jeopardy violation); and People v. Trotter (2002) 101 Cal.App.4th 1256, 124 Cal.Rptr.2d 765, review granted November 20, 2002, SI 10380 (no jeopardy violation) ... We are not aware of ... ...
- Royal v. Ranger Ins. Co.