What constitutes misconduct if a trial court makes discourteous and disparaging remarks to defense counsel?

"A trial court commits misconduct if it persistently makes discourteous and disparaging remarks to defense counsel so as to discredit the defense or create the impression it is allying itself with the prosecution. [Citations.] We have read each of the alleged instances of hostility in context. They fall far short of establishing misconduct or 'betray[ing] a bias against defense counsel.' [Citation.] . . . [W]e perceive nothing that crossed the line into improper behavior, and certainly nothing prejudicial to the defense cause. The trial court has the duty to control the trial. [Citations.] It effectively fulfilled that duty." (People v. Carpenter (1997) 15 Cal.4th 312, 353.) Here, too, St. Martin has not established that the trial court committed misconduct, or that the court prejudiced him. The record demonstrates the court's frustration, and even annoyance, with St. Martin's counsel. But the trial court's actions and statements, undertaken in its attempt to

Page 26

maintain control of the trial, did not come close to crossing the boundary into misconduct.