Logo
Searching Tips

When searching Forecite California, there are shortcuts you can take to find the information you are looking for:

1. By Code Section:

Forecite uses standard abbreviations for different types of codes. Those abbreviations can be found below:

Codes:
CCR California Code of Regulations
Corp C Corporations Code
EC Evidence Code
FG Fish and Game Code
GC Government Code
HN Harbors & Navigation Code
HS Health & Safety Code
PC Penal Code
RT Revenue & Tax Code
VC Vehicle Code
WI Welfare & Institutions Code

Using these codes to search is very simple. For example, if you wanted to search for Penal Code section 20, you would type PC 20 into the search box.

2. By CALJIC Number:

Since Forecite is indexed to CALJIC, searching for CALJIC numbers is easy. For example, to search for CALJIC 3.16, you would type 3.16 into the search box.

3. By Case Name or Citation:

To find a case or citation, simply enter all or part of the case’s citation. Since many cases are known only by one name involved, it is often helpful to not search for the entire citation. For example, if you were searching for references to People v. Geiger (84) 35 C3d 510, 526 [199 CR 45], you could search for People v. Geiger or just Geiger. Searching for Geiger might be more helpful since it would find references to the case that do not include the full citation.

  • Contact Us
  • Log In
  • My Account

  • Home
  • Firm Overview
  • Attorney Profiles
  • Practice Areas
  • Verdicts & Settlements
  • News & media
  • Blog
  • Contact

Back to  Previous Page
Back to top

Return to CALJIC Part 3-4 – Contents

F 4.36 n1  Giving Of CJ 4.36 In Specific Intent Case As Reversible Error. 

In People v. Anderson UNPUBLISHED (C016582), the court improperly gave CJ 4.36 — which states that ignorance of the law is no excuse — when the defendant was charged with the specific intent crimes of perjury and writing checks on insufficient funds.  (PC 118; PC 476a.)  The Court of Appeal held that the error was harmless as to the check writing charges because mistake of law was not at issue as to those charges.  However, the court reversed the perjury convictions because the evidence did raise a question as to whether the defendant was mistaken regarding his reporting obligations and the trial court had a sua sponte obligation to instruct correctly upon the legal principles relating to this factual issue.  [A copy of the opinion and briefing in Anderson is available to FORECITE subscribers.  Ask for Opinion Bank # O-183 and Brief Bank # B-643.]


F 4.36 n2  Error To Give CJ 4.36 In Sex Offender Registration (PC 290) Cases. 

(See People v. Garcia (2001) 25 C4th 744, 754 [107 CR2d 355] [court erred in giving “ignorance of the law is no excuse” instruction (CJ 4.36) “which on its face would allow the jury to convict defendant of failing to register even if he were unaware of his obligation to do so”]; see also People v. Hagen (98) 19 C4th 652, 660 [80 CR2d 24] [statutory “willfulness” requirement creates exception to common law presumption that ignorance or mistake of law is no excuse].)

(See FORECITE F 18.56 n12.)


F 4.36a  Mistake Of Law: Negates Specific Intent

See FORECITE F 3407 Inst 3. 

  • Register as New User
  • Contact Us
© James Publishing, Inc. (866) 72-JAMES