Is a defendant denied a fair trial if the prosecution's case depends substantially upon the testimony of his or her accomplice?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Homick, 150 Cal.Rptr.3d 1, 289 P.3d 791, 55 Cal.4th 816 (Cal. 2012):
[39] [40] [41] [42] [A] defendant is denied a fair trial if the prosecution's case depends substantially upon accomplice testimony and the accomplice witness is placed, either by the prosecution or the court, under a strong compulsion to testify in a particular fashion. ( People v. Medina [, supra,] 41 Cal.App.3d 438, 455 [116 Cal.Rptr. 133].) Thus, when
[289 P.3d 830]
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
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.
Other Questions
Can a defendant be denied a fair trial if the prosecution's case depends substantially on the testimony of an accomplice? (California, United States of America)
When a defendant makes a mid-trial motion to revoke his self represented status and have standby counsel appointed for the remainder of the trial, does the trial court have a duty to manage the trial? (California, United States of America)
When an accomplice is called as a witness by the prosecution, is the jury required to distrust the testimony of their accomplice's testimony? (California, United States of America)
Is a defendant's claim that the trial court's failure to provide him with the means and subpoena witnesses to defend at trial a violation of his Sixth Amendment right to represent himself at trial reversible? (California, United States of America)
Does the trial court abuse its discretion when it denied a defendant's motion to exclude the testimony of Page 35 of the Defendant's lawyer as more prejudicial than probative? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for a defendant's claim that he was denied his constitutional right to due process of law because the trial court relieved the prosecution of its burden of establishing that defendant acted with malice? (California, United States of America)
Does a motion for a new trial need to be denied because the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for new trial? (California, United States of America)
When will a jury consider the credibility of a defendant's extrajudicial statements against trial testimony and the physical evidence and testimony of witnesses? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for denying a motion for a new trial on the grounds that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the motion under the first two grounds? (California, United States of America)
Does a deputy district attorney acquiesce in having the motion heard during the trial of a defendant before trial, rather than prior to trial? (California, United States of America)
