People v. Egal CA2/1

Filed 10/22/15 P. v. Egal CA2/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

THE PEOPLE, B256245

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA417163) v.

ALI O. EGAL,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Craig E. Veals, Judge. Affirmed. Rachel Varnell, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Gerald A. Engler, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Assistant Attorney General, Steven D. Matthews and Roberta L. Davis, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ___________________________________

Ali O. Egal appeals from a judgment convicting him of driving under the influence (DUI), arguing the trial court erred in denying his motion for a new trial based upon jury misconduct. Defendant contends hearsay evidence that a juror had stated defendant’s failure to testify at trial was detrimental to his case obligated the trial court to hold an evidentiary hearing as to whether misconduct had occurred and whether it was prejudicial. We conclude that hearsay evidence of juror misconduct gives rise to no duty for the court to conduct further inquiries. We therefore affirm. Background On the morning of September 15, 2013, defendant attempted to avoid a driver sobriety checkpoint in Los Angeles by making an illegal turn. When instructed by a police officer to pull over to the curb, defendant at first stopped in the middle of the street, waited a while, staring at the officer, then abruptly turned his car to the curb at a 45-degree angle, narrowly missing a power pole, and left the car in drive. When police instructed him to put the car in park, defendant instead shifted into reverse, backed into the street, then with some difficulty made several attempts to parallel park, eventually stopping five feet from the curb. Defendant smelled strongly of alcohol and walked with an unsteady gait, and his eyes were bloodshot and his clothing disheveled. He denied having consumed any alcohol or medication that day or suffering from any physical defect or medical condition. Police then administered five field sobriety tests, each of which defendant failed. At the police station, defendant failed eight times to complete a breathalyzer test, appearing purposefully to blow onto the machine rather than into it, and was placed in a cell, where he urinated on the floor and defecated in his pants. Approximately an hour and 45 minutes after the arrest, a blood test showed defendant’s blood alcohol content was .15 percent. A jury found defendant guilty of driving under the influence of alcohol and driving with a blood alcohol level of .08 percent or more (Veh. Code, § 23152, subds. (a) & (b)), and it was determined he had suffered a prior felony DUI or vehicular manslaughter conviction and a conviction for felony DUI causing injury within the prior 10 years (ibid.; Veh. Code, § 23550.5, subd. (a)). It was further found defendant had