California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Leon, 189 Cal.Rptr.3d 703, 352 P.3d 289, 61 Cal.4th 569 (Cal. 2015):
8 At the time of defendant's trial, there was no right to attorney-conducted, sequestered voir dire. Code of Civil Procedure former section 223 directed the court to conduct voir dire, with supplemental questioning from the parties allowed upon a showing of good cause. (Code Civ. Proc., former 223 (added June 5, 1990, repealed eff. Dec. 31, 2000).) On appeal, defendant does not argue the court should have held sequestered or attorney-conducted voir dire, nor does he attempt to show good cause. Accordingly, any such claim has been waived. (See People v. Stanley, supra, 10 Cal.4th at p. 793, 42 Cal.Rptr.2d 543, 897 P.2d 481.)
8 At the time of defendant's trial, there was no right to attorney-conducted, sequestered voir dire. Code of Civil Procedure former section 223 directed the court to conduct voir dire, with supplemental questioning from the parties allowed upon a showing of good cause. (Code Civ. Proc., former 223 (added June 5, 1990, repealed eff. Dec. 31, 2000).) On appeal, defendant does not argue the court should have held sequestered or attorney-conducted voir dire, nor does he attempt to show good cause. Accordingly, any such claim has been waived. (See People v. Stanley, supra, 10 Cal.4th at p. 793, 42 Cal.Rptr.2d 543, 897 P.2d 481.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.