A judge’s prohibition on family members in the courtroom during jury selection was problematic, a split appeals court acknowledged.But it did not amount to a Sixth Amendment violation and does not require a new trial, the 3rd District Appellate Court has ruled.The Ottawa-based tribunal this week wrote the judge in the sexual assault trial of Cedric Childs should have specified why he banned family members of both the defendant and the victim from witnessing voir dire in April 2016.“However, after forfeiting the …