CALCRIM Is Not the Law
June 3rd, 2021
In People v. Burgess (Feb. 11, 2021, D076287) ___ Cal.App.4th ___ [pp. 6] the defendant maintained that his PC 29815 conviction must be reversed because no evidence showed his firearm restriction probation condition was ordered by a court. He pointed to the language in two jury instructions, CALCRIM Nos. 2512 and 3500, the first stating the jury must find a court ordered the firearm restriction and the second stating that his charge was “possession of a firearm by a person prohibited by a court order.” From these, Burgess argues an essential element of the offense—a court-ordered firearms restriction probation condition—was not been met.
The reviewing court rejected the defense contention because CALCRIM is “not the law….” (Ibid; see also PG XI(A)(3.3) Like CALJIC, CALCRIM Is Not Sacrosanct
Tags: CALCRIM Is Not The Law, CALCRIM Not Always Correct