Misconduct

Name: In re Melson
Case #: B336211
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 07/02/2026

Reversible error where prosecution failed to correct knowingly false witness identification testimony. Applying Napue v. Illinois (1959) 360 U.S. 264, the reviewing court found that the People failed to comply with the constitutional obligation to correct false testimony after two eyewitnesses changed their testimony at defendant's second trial to falsely claim that they had initially told the police certain key identifying features about the defendant. Considering the matter as a whole, including the lack of preparation by trial counsel to cross-examine the two witnesses, the People did not show beyond a reasonable doubt that the false testimony did not contribute…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Heaps
Case #: B329296
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Opinion Date: 02/02/2026

The trial court committed reversible error by violating appellant’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel. During deliberations, the jury sent the court a note expressing concern about whether a juror had sufficient command of English to deliberate. Without informing counsel of the note, the court had the judicial assistant (JA) speak to the jury about whether they could continue to deliberate, and if not, to send them home. The jurors continued to deliberate then later told the JA that the note did not need to be addressed. Respondent failed to demonstrate that the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

The full…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Rockhill
Case #: B335084
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 7
Opinion Date: 11/12/2025

Trial court judge’s ex parte communication with a prosecutor demonstrated sufficient “probability of actual judicial bias” to constitute structural error. After the defendant testified, the prosecutor indicated she would not present rebuttal but did not officially rest; the judge then contacted another prosecutor to encourage calling a specific rebuttal witness. This attempt “to assist the prosecution in obtaining a conviction” justifies reversal without regard to prejudice.

The full opinion is available on the court’s website here: https://www4.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/B335084.PDF

Trial court judge’s ex parte communication with a prosecutor demonstrated sufficient “probability of actual judicial bias” to constitute structural error. After the defendant testified, the prosecutor indicated she would not present rebuttal but did not officially rest; the judge then contacted another prosecutor to encourage calling a specific rebuttal witness. This attempt “to assist the prosecution in obtaining a conviction” justifies reversal without regard to prejudice.

The full opinion is available on the court’s website here: https://www4.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/B335084.PDF

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Jasso
Case #: S179454
Court: CA Supreme Court
Opinion Date: 04/03/2025

Death penalty affirmance in robbery-murder. Non-capital holdings:

(1) No double hearsay error when officer testified to co-defendant’s confession made to a friend, as related by the friend; confession was sufficiently self-inculpatory to qualify as statement against interest (EC 1230) and trial counsel’s failure to object that friend’s statement to police also lacked valid exception forfeited error. Backup ineffective assistance of counsel claim rejected and more properly raised via habeas.

(2) Erroneous admission of unrelated hearsay under EC 1230 harmless under Watson.

(3) Trial counsel not constitutionally ineffective for failing to object when prosecutor's leading questions to a witness who refused to testify allegedly…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Tuilaepa
Case #: B310753
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 7
Opinion Date: 02/24/2025

Order to show cause issued in capital habeas proceeding. In non-capital holdings: (1) at the prima facie habeas stage, the trial court erred by “weighing” facts in defense experts’ declarations against rest of record and also “assessing the credibility” of the declarations; (2) the trial court’s legal errors did not suggest judicial bias requiring CCP 170.1 disqualification on remand.

The full opinion is available on the court’s website here:

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Jones
Case #: A168930
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 11/21/2024

Any trial error regarding when an entry occurred during a burglary was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt given the verdict in this case. After the close of evidence, the prosecution raised a new theory of burglary, arguing defendant had the requisite intent to commit a burglary when defendant later entered the victim C.M.’s bedroom instead of when he first entered her apartment.  Any error regarding this new theory and the denial of a unanimity instruction was harmless under Chapman because of the jury’s true finding on the burglary circumstance attached to a count of sexual penetration in the kitchen; since…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Mejia
Case #: B320116
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 8
Opinion Date: 08/30/2024

The Court of Appeal affirms appellant’s conviction of VC 20001 after jury trial. Showing a witness three six-pack photo lineups did not offend due process. The trial court did not err in denying a mistrial based on the prosecution’s comments in violation of the court’s ruling prohibiting the mention of whether immediate assistance could have saved the victim’s life. There was sufficient evidence that appellant’s flight from the scene injured the victim beyond the trauma of the initial impact to support an enhancement under PC 12022.7. Restitution is proper for injuries caused by flight from the scene, not injuries from…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Hill
Case #: A166191
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 09/03/2024

Habeas petitioner establishes a prima facie case for relief under both Brady and Napue based on the prosecution’s failure to disclose promised leniency to a key witness and the prosecution’s subsequent use of the witness’s false statements during trial. After Hill was convicted and sentenced to death in 1987 for murder, postconviction discovery revealed a promise not to prosecute a key prosecution witness, and that virtually all the prosecution witnesses received favorable treatment from the prosecution in connection with their own criminal matters and/or rewards for the information they provided. Hill’s habeas petition established a prima facie case that the…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Nadey
Case #: S087560
Court: CA Supreme Court
District CalSup
Opinion Date: 06/17/2024

Trial court did not err in rejecting defendant’s Batson/Wheeler claims. In an automatic appeal from a judgment of death, the Supreme Court rejected defendant’s claim that he was denied his constitutional rights to equal protection and a representative jury because the prosecutor exercised peremptory challenges to exclude Black women from the jury. Substantial evidence supports the trial court’s ruling that each of the five Black female jurors was excused for permissible reasons, including hesitancy about imposing the death penalty. The court also rejected claims of error and prosecutorial misconduct regarding testimony and argument about a defense retained DNA expert who…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Herrera
Case #: A165248
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 05/22/2024

The Court of Appeal holds that no juror misconduct occurred where the deliberating jurors watched surveillance video clips back-to-back on a loop and in slow motion. There was no evidence the jurors performed any editing, and viewing the videos in slow motion allowed for closer scrutiny. The court also finds no prejudicial juror misconduct occurred where a juror agreed to vote for guilt in exchange for the other jurors agreeing to sign a “we urge leniency” note. While consideration of punishment was improper, there was no prejudice because the juror believed the defendant was guilty when she asked for the…

View Full Summary