Court Opinion

ID: 9627083
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 08:33:20.772703+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:29:05.088510
License: Public Domain

MOSK, J.,
Concurring—I concur in the judgment. I join the majority in concluding that prejudicial juror misconduct occurred at the guilt phase of defendant’s trial.
Thereafter, I part company with them; there is no need to proceed further. On retrial, I am sure, the prosecution and defense will fully relitigate the claimed Miranda violations (Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436 [16 L.Ed.2d 694, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 10 A.L.R.3d 974]). This is now inevitable since a majority held in People v. Mattson, ante, 826, at pages 848-869 [268 Cal.Rptr. 802, 789 P.2d 983], that a previous ruling by this court on the admissibility of evidence is not controlling on the trial court in a subsequent retrial. Therefore, whatever “guidance” is contained in the majority’s discussion is likely to do little more than help the parties “prepare” their witnesses.