You might well be troubled by cold-hit DNA cases, as well as peremptory challenges suspiciously directed towards a particular gender or racial group. I know I am.
Nonetheless, I think that Justice Cantil-Sakauye not only is entirely correct in this one, and that defendant's conviction was rightly upheld, but that the underlying case in the trial court is a good example of what should happen in these types of cases. It's a very reasonable, forthright opinion in the Court of Appeal that resolves a case in which the concerns below were carefully considered and addressed by the trial court.
So I liked it. It made me feel good about the system. Notwithstanding the absurd sentence of "160 years to life" awarded to the defendant. Whichever comes first, I guess.
