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 Practice Guide Table of Contents

PG II(E)  Reference To Specific Facts/Witnesses.

(1) Improper To Single Out Particular Witness:

“It is improper… for the court to single out a particular witness in an instruction, since by so doing, the court charge becomes a comment on how the evidence should be considered, rather than a general instruction on a defense theory. [Citations.]”  People v. Harris (89) 47 C3d 1047, 1099.  However, “in certain circumstances clarity requires that [the instructions] be made to refer specifically to the facts before the court.”  (People v. Rollo (79) 20 C3d 109, 123, fn 6.)

[See also FORECITE BIBLIO, “Language/Drafting of Instructions” (BIBLIO L)]

(2) Deleting Reference To Specific Crime To “Sanitize” A Prior Conviction:

It has been suggested that the potential prejudice of a prior conviction may be limited by “sanitizing” the conviction to avoid reference to the specific offense.  (Cf., People v Gray (2007) 158 CA4th 635, 642 [CALCRIM 316 modified (incorrectly) to refer to crimes “involving dishonesty”].)  However, presentation of an unspecified prior felony conviction to the jurors invites prejudicial speculation. (See People v. Rollo (77) 20 C3d 109, 115-20; see also People v. Stewart (2004) 33 C4th 425, 479 [not unreasonable for counsel to opt for specification of several specific priors in lieu of having unspecified prior]; People v. Barrick (82) 33 C3d 115, 126-28; People v. Jimenez (9th Cir. 2000) 214 F3d 1095, 1099 [reference to prior as “felony involving firearm” was improper].)

(3) Blanket Admonition May Be Undercut By List Of Specific Items.

In revising CC 101 in April 2010 the CALCRIM Committee deliberately did not list specific electronic devices by name. “The Committee concluded that a list of specific Web sites such as Google, Facebook, and MySpace is likely to require constant updates because popular Web sites come and go very quickly in the digital age. Moreover, when jurors hear a blanket admonition not to communicate with others about the trial, that admonition may be undercut by a list of specific forbidden means of communication. After listening to a long list, jurors may even conclude that modes of communication not mentioned are permitted.” (Advisory Committee on Criminal Jury Instructions. Report to the Judicial Council for meeting of April 23, 2010, pp. 3-4 [http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/jc/documents/reports/20100423itema4.pdf].)

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