The Court of Appeal holds that counsel’s failure to object to the court’s statements during jury selection and sentencing forfeited appellant’s RJA (PC 745) claims based on those statements. [Editor’s Note: The statement at sentencing included the trial court’s description of the black client as a “strong young buck.” The Attorney General conceded the use of this term violated the RJA but the Court of Appeal rejected this concession] Further, the Court of Appeal held that a peremptory challenge of a juror did not violate the RJA or CCP 231.7.  And the trial court was not required to instruct the jury on misdemeanor false imprisonment (PC 236) as a lesser included of felony false imprisonment (PC 237) because there was not substantial evidence that appellant committed misdemeanor false imprisonment.

The full opinion is available on the court’s website here: https://www4.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/H050597.PDF