P. v. Betz CA3
Defendant Richard Lee Betz appeals his conviction following a jury trial for committing 18 counts of lewd and lascivious acts upon a child under the age of 14. On appeal, he contends the trial court erred when it failed to instruct the prospective jurors not to conduct independent research and compounded the error by failing to replace the jury panel when a prospective juror made a statement based on his independent research; erred by instructing the jury that it could consider expert testimony as evidence that the complaining witness was telling the truth; and that these two errors were separately and cumulatively prejudicial. Defendant also contends his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance when he requested the trial court to provide a “firecracker” instruction to the jury after they indicated they could not agree on a finding of guilt as to a single charged count.
Comments on P. v. Betz CA3