P. v. Sanchez
Appellant, Albert Sanchez, challenges his conviction for possession of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, 11377, subd. (a)). According to appellant, the trial court deprived him of his right to an impartial jury by failing to inquire into the alleged bias of one of the jurors. Appellant further asserts that his trial was tainted by judicial misconduct because the trial court incorrectly accused defense counsel of using an improper question during voir dire. Appellant also contends that statements he made were admitted in violation of Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436 (Miranda). Finally, appellant challenges his sentence on the ground that he is entitled to additional presentence custody credit. As discussed below, appellant had unused peremptory challenges available when the jury was impaneled. Consequently, appellant did not preserve the juror bias issue for appeal. Further, contrary to appellants position, the trial courts comments on defense counsels voir dire did not imply that counsel engaged in improper conduct. Moreover, the trial court correctly ruled that appellant was not in custody when he made the incriminating statements. Thus, no Miranda violation occurred. Accordingly, the conviction will be affirmed. However, appellant is entitled to additional presentence custody credit and the judgment will be modified accordingly.
Comments on P. v. Sanchez