Heriberto Rodriguez v. County of Los Angeles, 891 F.3d 776 (2018)

Citation: Heriberto Rodriguez v. County of Los Angeles, 891 F.3d 776 (2018)
Parent Document: Heriberto Rodriguez v. County of Los Angeles, 891 F.3d 776 (2018)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 2018-05-30
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4502306/heriberto-rodriguez-v-county-of... ↗

Full Text

1,105 chars

The next day, after he had been seated on the jury, S.M.
submitted a note to the judge stating that his father was
currently vice-president of the ACLU Foundation of Southern
California and had previously served as president. S.M.
explained that he had forgotten the connection during voir
dire because his father’s “primary work” was in entertainment
law, and because his father spent comparatively little time
doing pro bono work for the ACLU Foundation. In response
to questioning, S.M. stated that he and his family members
had discussed “issues of jail inmates” during the previous six
months and that he and his family members agreed that
prisoners “certainly need[] protection of their civil rights and
constitutional rights . . . despite the fact they are
incarcerated.” S.M. stated, however, that he was not sure
whether any of these discussions concerned abuses on the
part of LASD, and stated that his father had not talked to him
about litigation related to prisoners’ rights. Appellants again
moved to excuse S.M. for cause. The court again denied the
motion. S.M. became the jury foreperson.

Other Sections in This Document (185)

Full Text