Tag Archives: CC 875


A Butter Knife Was Not a Deadly Weapon Because the Defendant Did Not Use It in a Manner “Capable of” And “Likely to Produce” Death or Great Bodily Injury
April 19th, 2020

In order “for an object to qualify as a deadly weapon based on how it was used, [and demonstrate the commission of an assault with a deadly weapon,] the defendant must have used the object in a manner not only capable of producing but also likely to produce death or great bodily injury.”  (Original emphasis.)  […]


Tags: , ,


Reviewing Court Reverses Conviction and Enhancement Due to CALCRIM’s Erroneous Definition of Great Bodily Injury — Over 40 CC Instructions Potentially Affected
March 10th, 2020

People v. Medellin (Feb. 20, 2020, F076022) *** Cal.App.5th *** [pp. 12] concluded that the CALCRIM definition of “great bodily harm” [GBI] in CC 875 and CC 3160 erroneously allowed the prosecutor to argue and the jury to find GBI based on either greater than minor harm or greater than moderate harm. This “alternate theory […]


Tags: , , ,


Is A Butter Knife An Inherently Deadly Weapon?
September 17th, 2019

In re B.M. (2018) 6 Cal.5th 528, 531-39 the CSC held that there was no substantial evidence that B.M. use of a butter knife was likely to cause great bodily injury within the meaning of PC 245(a). The Court reaffirmed its rule that an object alleged to be a deadly weapon must be used in […]


Tags: , ,


Definition of Deadly Weapon Corrected
July 3rd, 2015

  People v. Brown (2012) 210 Cal. App. 4th 1, 4, considered weapons such as BB guns, and noted that CC 375’s definition of a “deadly weapon,” “which includes objects that are inherently ‘dangerous’ as well as inherently ‘deadly,’ is, at best, ambiguous and, at worst, overbroad.” “[CC 875] may impermissibly allow a jury to […]


Tags: , ,


Assault Instruction May Confuse Jurors in Multiple Victim Situations
June 30th, 2015

“Element No. 1 of [CC 875] requires that the prosecution prove that ‘The defendant did an act with a deadly weapon that by its nature would directly and probably result in the application of force to a person.’ But Element 2 merely requires that ‘When the defendant acted, he was aware of facts that would […]


Tags: ,