The People, Plaintiff and Respondent v. Crandell McKinnon, Defen — Werdegar, J., Concurring in Part and Dissenting…

Summary

The opinion agrees that the defendant did not forfeit the juror-excusal claim under then-existing law, but that capital defendants must make a timely objection prospectively. It disagrees on the merits, concluding that Prospective Juror R.A.'s written questionnaire responses did not clearly and unequivocally establish that his views would prevent or substantially impair his ability to follow the law. Because the opinion is a concurrence and dissent, it would reverse the penalty judgment rather than uphold the majority's conclusion.