Does the trial court err in sealing the jury's verdict on count 2 while instructing the jury to continue deliberation on count 1?

The trial court did not err in sealing the jury's verdict on count 2 while instructing the jury to continue its deliberation on count 1. The trial court in People v. Hernandez, supra, 163 Cal.App.3d 645, utilized the same approach, and upon the jury's request, permitted the jury to reconsider its decision in the sealed count. (Id. at p. 649.) Although here the jury did not request to reconsider its decision in the sealed count, it had the right to do so if it so desired. "[I]f any juror states that the verdict does not reflect his or her true intent, sections 1163 and 1164, subdivision (a) require the court to order further deliberations. In these ways, the statutory scheme provides courts with specific mechanisms for prompting a jury's reconsideration of an erroneous or inconsistent verdict." (People v. Carbajal, supra, 56 Cal.4th at p. 537.) Each of the jurors confirmed that the verdicts were his or her individual verdicts.

Page 19

Section 1161 does not provide that a trial court "must" direct the jury to reconsider their verdict when it appears to the court that the jury had mistaken the law. The statute on its face provides that a trial court "may" direct the jury to reconsider their verdict. In addition, People v. Carbajal, supra, 56 Cal.4th at page 537 merely provides that the trial court "should" comply the provisions of section 1161. That is, the trial court is permitted to require the jury to reconsider their verdict when it suspects that the jury made a mistake of law, but it is not mandatory for the trial court to do so.