P. v. Ramos
A jury convicted defendant of premeditated murder and, in a separate phase of the trial, rejected his claim that he was not guilty by reason of insanity. On appeal, defendant asserts the premeditated murder judgment should be reversed because (1) the trial court erred in denying his Batson/Wheeler[1] motion based on the prosecutor's use of peremptory challenges to excuse three Hispanic prospective jurors; (2) during closing argument the prosecutor misstated the law and improperly referred to defendant's decision not to testify; and (3) there is insufficient evidence of premeditation and deliberation. We find no reversible error and affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Ramos