P. v. Lozano
Argelio Lozano appeals following a jury trial. He was convicted of receiving stolen property, evading an officer, hit and run, and obstructing a peace officer in the performance of duties. He argues that his conviction should be reversed because the trial court improperly restricted his voir dire of prospective jurors, the jury was given misleading and confusing instructions on circumstantial evidence, and the court gave an unwarranted instruction on expert testimony. We conclude that the trial court did not improperly restrict the scope of voir dire, and that Lozano’s challenges to the instructions were forfeited due to his failure to raise them in the trial court. Moreover, we conclude there was no instructional error. Thus, we affirm.
Comments on P. v. Lozano