Involuntary Unconsciousness from Prescription Medication
June 1st, 2015
The Mathson case makes it clear that if a defendant did not know and could not have reasonably known that his use of Ambien could cause sleep driving, this was involuntary intoxication and the resulting unconsciousness was a complete defense to driving under the influence. (People v. Mathson (2012) 210 Cal. App. 4th 1297.)
Tags: CC 3425, Defense Theory: Intoxication, Defense Theory: Unconsciousness
CC 3425 Unconsciousness: Improper Presumption of Consciousness
May 29th, 2015
In response, CC 3425 was revised. As explained by the Committee, “In People v. Mathson, [] the Court of Appeal concluded that because the instruction’s standard concluding language on reasonable doubt said ‘if, however’ instead of ‘unless,’ it was ‘unnecessarily ambiguous.’ The court also suggested adding an explanation that only involuntary intoxication is the […]
Tags: CC 3425, Defense Theory: Unconsciousness, Inferences and Presumptions
Court of Appeal Identifies Flaws in Unconsciousness Instruction
May 25th, 2015
People Mathson (2012) 210 Cal. App. 4th 1297, disapproved CC 3425 with respect to the portion that reads, “If there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant acted as if he were conscious, you should conclude that he was legally conscious.” The Court of Appeal noted two problems: (1) The instruction is ambiguous […]
Tags: CC 3425, Defense Theory: Unconsciousness
False Statements And Criminal Street Gangs
March 1st, 2014
People v. Fuentes (2009) 171 Cal. App. 4th 1139, held that CC 362 does not conflict with instructions on criminal street-gang participation.
Tags: CC 3425, CC 362, Consciousness of Guilt, False Statements, Gangs
