All posts by jpadmin

Propensity Instruction: Due Process Challenge

 

People v. Villatoro (2012) 54 Cal. 4th 1152, upheld a modified CC 1191 instruction, which stated that all offenses must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. This instruction did not violate defendant’s due process rights or impermissibly lower the standard of proof even though it did not specifically address the standard of proof to be used to draw inferences from charged offenses. People v. Miramontes (2011) 189 Cal. App. 4th 1085, upheld CC 1191 against a challenge that the admission of propensity evidence violates due process. In so holding, Miramontes relied upon the prior California Supreme Court decision in People v. Reliford (2003) 29 Cal. 4th 1007, 1012-1016.

Jurors Must Be Admonished At Every Adjournment

When it revised CC 124 in August of 2012, the CC Committee stated, “Penal Code section 1122(a)(1), and Code of Civil Procedure section 1209(a)(6), now require the court to admonish jurors before each adjournment, not to use electronic or wireless communication.” Therefore the committee added such an admonition to CC 124. (Advisory Committee on Criminal Jury Instructions, Report to the Judicial Council for meeting of August 31, 2012, p. 3.)