Error to Imply That Juror Notes Are per se Less Accurate than Reporter’s
March 11th, 2021
It is well established that the jurors have a right to request readback of testimony during their deliberations. (See e.g., People v. Triplett (2020) 48 Cal.App.5th 655, 662 [If the jury requests transcripts, the court should remind the jury of the right to request readback and to advise the court whether there is any testimony […]
Tags: CC 104, CC 202, CC 222, Deliberations of Jury
CC 202 Erroneously Limits Jurors’ Ability To Request Readback Of Testimony
December 16th, 2020
CC 202 instructs the jurors as follows: If there is a disagreement about the testimony [and stipulations] at trial, you may ask that the (court reporter’s record be read to/court’s recording be played for) you. This language is too limited because jurors should have the ability to request readback of testimony even if […]
Tags: CC 104, CC 202, CC 222, Deliberations of Jury, Readback Issues, Sample Instructions
CALCRIM Revisions
June 28th, 2019
Effective March 15, 2019 the Judicial Council approved for publication revisions to the following CALCRIM instructions which were published in the March 2019 edition of the Judicial Council of California Criminal Jury Instructions. Instruction Number Instruction Title 104, 202, 222 Evidence, Note-Taking and Read Back of Evidence 301, 334, 335 Single […]
Tags: CALCRIM Revisions, CC 104, CC 1145, CC 1161, CC 1162, CC 1244, CC 1650, CC 1900, CC 1901, CC 1902, CC 1904, CC 1905, CC 1930, CC 1932, CC 1935, CC 202, CC 2140, CC 222, CC 2300, CC 2500, CC 2530, CC 2962, CC 301, CC 3181, CC 335, CC 3412, CC 3413, CC 3426, CC 3454, CC 520, CC 625, CC 707, CC 708, CC 984
