Rejection or Disbelief of Alibi or Third Party Guilt Evidence
February 23rd, 2015
This post [0003 Centeno] discusses the problem of juror confusion regarding whether rejection or disbelief of defense evidence can supply proof that is missing from the prosecution’s evidence. This risk is particularly high with defenses such as alibi and third party guilt. The greatest danger of diluting the burden of proof in such cases is […]
Tags: Alibi, Burden Of Proof, Defense Theory Instructions, Duty to Instruct, Duty to Instruction, Misstatement Of Law, Presumption of Innocence, Prosecutor Misconduct, Sample Instructions, Third Party Guilt
Synonymous Terminology Used to Designate a Person Who Committed a Crime
February 20th, 2015
PC 31 and PC 971 use the use the word “principal” to designate a person who may be liable to be convicted for committing a crime. However, some cases use descriptive words such as “participant” or “confederate.” And, some jury instructions (e.g., CC 373, CC 402, CC 415, CC 540C, CC 541C, and CC […]
Tags: CC 3117, CC 373, CC 402, CC 415, CC 540C, CC 541C, CC 563, Jury Instruction Language
Partial Acquittal Rule: Does Stone Survive Blueford?
February 16th, 2015
In Stone v. Superior Court (1982) 31 Cal.3d 503 the court recognized that the “deceptively simple” yet “complex, rapidly expanding body of law” surrounding the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy arose from both the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, section 15 of the California Constitution. However, Blueford v. […]
Tags: CC 3517, CC 3518, CC 3519, CC 542, CC 641, CC 643, Jury Deliberation, Partial Acquittal, Verdict
Use of Diagram or Visual Aid to Explain Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt
February 13th, 2015
In People v. Centeno (2014) 60 Cal. 4th 659, 662 the prosecutor used a diagram showing the boundaries of California and urged the jury to convict based on a “reasonable” view of the evidence. In addressing this issue the CSC discussed several related cases: The case law is replete with innovative but ill-fated attempts […]
Tags: Beyond A Reasonable Doubt, Burden Of Proof, CC 100, CC 101, CC 220, Charts and Diagrams, Defense Theory Instructions, Misstatement Of Law, Presumption of Innocence, Prosecutor Misconduct
No Sua Sponte Duty To Instruct On Defense Theory That Negates An Element Of The Offense; IAC For Failure To Request Defense Theory Instruction
February 9th, 2015
People v. Hussain (2014) 231 Cal. App. 4th 261, 269-72, extended the holding of People v. Anderson (2011) 51 Cal.4th 989, 998 [trial courts do not have a duty to instruct sua sponte on the defense of accident] to a situation where the defendant relied claim of right to negate the felonious intent to […]
Tags: CC 1600, CC 1800, CC 1863, Claim of Right, Defense Theory Instructions, Duty to Instruct, Ineffective Assistance of Counsel (IAC), Judge Duty to Instruct, Robbery, Sua Sponte, Theft
Substantial Evidence Of Guilt Does Not Cure Instruction That Omits Or Misstates An Element Of The Charged Offense
February 6th, 2015
As with the total failure to instruct on an element of the charge, misinstruction on an element warrants reversal if “the jury could have reasonably concluded that the prosecution failed to prove [the element] beyond a reasonable doubt ….” (People v. Wilkins (2013) 56 Cal. 4th 333, 350-51.) This requires the reviewing court to […]
Tags: Appeal, Apprendi, Chapman, Elements Of Charge, Judge Duty to Instruct, Neder, Standard of Prejudice
Aider And Abettor: Natural And Probable Consequences – Right To Pinpoint Instruction On Defense Theory That Non-Target Crime Was The Independent Product Of The Perpetrator’s Mind Outside Of, Or Foreign To, The Common Design
January 30th, 2015
People v. Smith (2014) 60 Cal. 4th 603 eliminated an element of the natural and probable consequences liability which the prosecution was required to prove by CC 402. However, in so doing Smith provided a basis for a defense pinpoint instruction relating the natural and probable consequences doctrine to evidence that the perpetrator of […]
Tags: Accomplice Liability, Aider and Abettor, CC 402, CC 403, Defense Theory Instructions, Natural and Probable Consequences, Non-CALCRIM
CALCRIM Is Not The Law And Is Not Sacrosanct
January 27th, 2015
“Jury instructions are only judge-made attempts to recast the words of statutes and the elements of crimes into words in terms comprehensible to the lay person. The texts of standard jury instructions are not debated and hammered out by legislators, but by ad hoc committees of lawyers and judges. Jury instructions do not come […]
Tags: CALCRIM Is Not The Law, CALCRIM Not Always Correct, CC 402, Judge Duty to Instruct, Judge Duty To Instruct Correctly, Pattern Instructions Not Sacrosanct
Aider And Abettor: Natural And Probable Consequences – Unanimity As To Commission Of Nontarget Offense
January 21st, 2015
The majority opinion in People v. Smith (2014) 60 Cal. 4th 603 concluded that the requirement of juror unanimity as to all essential elements of the charge does not apply to commission of the nontarget offense alleged under the natural and probable consequences doctrine: The prosecution theory was that Littleton was the killer. […]
Tags: Accomplice Liability, Aider and Abettor, Apprendi, Attempted Murder, CC 3500, CC 3501, CC 3502, CC 400, CC 401, CC 402, CC 403, Homicide, Mens Rea, Natural and Probable Consequences, Premeditation and Deliberation
Mens Rea For Embezzlement: Intent To Temporarily Deprive
December 30th, 2014
People v. Casas (2010) 184 Cal. App. 4th 1242, 1247, concluded that the trial court correctly modified CC 1808 to instruct the jury that “an intent to temporarily deprive was sufficient to prove the mens rea of the crime of embezzlement.” Although not fully clear from the Casas opinion, the trial court’s modification was […]
Tags: CC 1808, Embezzlement, Mens Rea: Intent
