legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Arthur
A jury convicted defendant of attempted robbery, false imprisonment, and other charges arising from an alleged home invasion robbery. Defendant contends that the trial court prejudicially erred by: (1) failing to adequately investigate whether one of the jurors slept during material portions of the trial, and (2) upholding a defense witness's refusal to testify on Fifth Amendment grounds. Defendant contends in the alternative that there was insufficient evidence to sustain his attempted robbery conviction. Court find no reversible error or insufficiency of the evidence, and affirm the judgment.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale