Category Archives: Blog

Blog

Further Instructions During Deliberations

Leave a comment

 

As explained by the CC Committee:

 

This committee drafted [CC 3351], Further Instruction About Deliberations, at the suggestion of two council members who are former CC committee members, Judge Mary Ann O’Malley of Contra Costa County and Judge Terri Jackson of San Francisco. The judges expressed concern that without a CC instruction to give to deadlocked juries, the courts will be forced to either improvise or simply repeat the lengthy admonition approved in People v. Moore (2001) 96 Cal. App. 4th 1105, 1118. The committee took care to avoid the pitfalls mentioned in People v. Gainer (1977) 19 Cal. 3d 835, 842, such as singling out minority jurors or admonishing them that “the case must at some time be decided.” (Advisory Committee on Criminal Jury Instructions, Report to the Judicial Council for meeting of February 28, 2012, pp. 3-4.)

Blog

Attempted Murder

Leave a comment

 

Attempted Murder: Revision Of Attempted Murder Instruction Per People v. Stone (2009) 46 Cal. 4th 131

 

The committee revised CC 600, Attempted Murder, in accordance with People v. Stone (2009) 46 Cal. 4th 131. In Stone, the Supreme Court made a direct suggestion to improve the language of CC 600 regarding the kill zone, which the committee followed. The Stone opinion also found that a person who intends to kill may be guilty of attempted murder even if that person has no specific target in mind. As a result, the committee changed the directions for filling in the blank regarding the victim of the attempted murder. It now instructs to insert the ‘name or description’ of the victim. (Advisory Committee on Criminal Jury Instructions Report (July 11, 2009), at p. 3, [emphasis in original].)

 

Before being revised, the use of CC 600 was upheld in a “kill zone” attempted murder by People v. Adams (2008) 169 Cal. App. 4th 1009, 1023.

Blog

Attempted Murder: Intent

Leave a comment

 

People v. Ramos (2011) 193 Cal. App. 4th 43, 47, concluded that CC 600 adequately instructs jurors on the intent required for attempted murder. Its language is virtually identical to CJ 8.66, except that CC 600 does not reference “malice aforethought” in defining murder. The Court of Appeal held that, “To instruct on the definition of malice is unnecessary and confusing because [CC 600] is a complete and adequate instruction.” (Ibid.)

Blog

Voluntary Intoxication Resulting in Unconsciousness Instruction Not Applicable To Second Degree Murder Due To Drunk Driving

Leave a comment

 

People v. Ferguson (2011) 194 Cal. App. 4th 1070, 1082, held that although voluntary intoxication resulting in unconsciousness will normally reduce second degree murder to involuntary manslaughter, it does not do so in the context of drunk driving because the manslaughter statute states it is inapplicable “to acts committed in the driving of a vehicle.” Hence, CC 626 should not be used in cases where a defendant is charged with second degree murder due to driving under the influence.

Blog

Robbery: Constructive Possession Of Employer’s Property

Leave a comment

 

The Advisory Committee on Criminal Jury Instructions revised CC 1600 in August, 2009, and stated:

 

The committee revised [CC No. 1600], Robbery, after the Supreme Court rendered its opinion in People v. Scott (2009) 45 Cal. 4th 743. The Scott case found that an employee on duty has constructive possession of the employer’s property during a robbery.

 

CC 1600 now provides that “A (store/[or] business) (employee___<insert description> who is on duty has possession of the (store/[or] business) owner’s property.