What if the trial court erred by admitting defendant's statements?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Ruiz, E065420 (Cal. App. 2017):
Even if the trial court erred by admitting defendant's statements, the result would be the same. The erroneous denial of a motion to suppress "is subject to harmless error analysis under the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard of Chapman v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 18." (People v. Neal, supra, 31 Cal.4th at p. 86.)
"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
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)
Are there any cases where a trial court erred by admitting that a defendant made false statements during a search and seizure? (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)
What is the test for admitting to the Court of Appeal that a defendant admitted that he was a witness to the murder trial? (California, United States of America)
How does the Court of Appeal review a trial court's ruling to admit evidence over defendant's objection based on evidence section 352? (California, United States of America)
When a defendant's out-of-court statement is admitted to a jury, does the court have to instruct the jury that this evidence must be viewed with caution? (California, United States of America)
Does Defendant have a claim that the trial court abused its discretion to treat Defendant as a "defendant" in a medical malpractice case? (California, United States of America)
When a defendant's extrajudicial statements form part of the prosecution's evidence, does the trial court have to instruct sua sponte that a finding of guilt cannot be predicated on the statements alone? (California, United States of America)
In a dual jury trial where two defendants have admitted extrajudicial statements against one defendant, what is the procedure in which one of the juries is to be excused? (California, United States of America)
Does a defendant have any grounds to argue that the trial court erred in failing to give the cautionary instruction at the end of trial? (California, United States of America)
