California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Johnson, 241 Cal.Rptr.3d 782, 432 P.3d 536, 6 Cal.5th 541 (Cal. 2018):
Defendant faults the court for failing to warn him that an assault against his attorney could specifically lead to his permanent expulsion from the trial. We disagree. Defendant was already aware that continued misconduct could result in his removal, given that the trial court had removed him from the courtroom based on his outbursts during his first trial. (See People v. Sully (1991) 53 Cal.3d 1195, 1240, 283 Cal.Rptr. 144, 812 P.2d 163 ; cf. People v. Medina , supra , 11 Cal.4th at p. 731, 47 Cal.Rptr.2d 165, 906 P.2d 2 [defendants outburst in a prior trial in a different county justified shackling].) Defendant had no statutory or constitutional right to an estimate of how long he might be barred from the courtroom if his misconduct were to escalate. After all, the duration of his removal from the courtroom depended on the trial courts assessment of whether and when he would no longer pose a threat to the
[241 Cal.Rptr.3d 806]
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.