Tag Archives: Sua Sponte


Felony Murder Special Circumstance: “Reckless Indifference” Should Be Defined
March 22nd, 2021

In reliance upon People v. Estrada (1995) 11 Cal.4th 568, 578 the CC states that the court does not have a sua sponte duty to define “reckless indifference to human life.”   Estrada concluded that there is no sua sponte duty as follows: We disagree and find that, when considered in its entirety — as […]


Tags: , , , , , , , ,


Overcoming the “Walking Dictionary Myth” When Instructing the Jury
March 17th, 2021

Jury instruction jurisprudence attempts to draw a “bright line” distinction between terms which have a technical, specialized legal meaning and those which are defined by their common dictionary meaning. On one side of this “bright line” the trial judge must sua sponte define terms which have a “technical meaning peculiar to the law.” (See People […]


Tags: , , ,


Extortion: Sample Instruction on Affirmative Defense of Litigation Privilege
February 13th, 2020

In People v. Toledano DEPUBLISHED (2019) 36 Cal.App.5th 715 (G051787) a jury convicted Toledano of conspiracy to commit extortion and attempted extortion. The Court of Appeal reversed the judgment because the trial court prejudicially erred by not instructing the jury on Toledano’s affirmative defense that his actions were protected under the litigation privilege.   The […]


Tags: , , , , ,


Lying in Wait Special Circumstance: Judge Was Required to Sua Sponte Instruct on Circumstantial Evidence
November 2nd, 2018

In People v. Sandoval (2015) 62 Cal.4th 394 the CSC reversed the lying in wait special circumstance because the trial judge failed to sua sponte instruct, per CJ 8.83 or CJ 8,83.1 that between two reasonable inferences from circumstantial evidence, the jury must choose the inference pointing to innocence: “We … conclude that the prosecution’s […]


Tags: , , , ,


Instruction Concerning Double-Counting of Aggravating Factor must Be Requested
July 28th, 2016

People v. Salazar (2016) 63 C4th 214, 254 held that the double counting instruction must be requested: “Defendant claims his prior murder conviction was improperly used both as a special circumstance under section 190.2, subdivision (a) and as an aggravating factor under section 190.3, factors (b) and (c). He contends the jury should have been […]


Tags: , ,


Cautionary Instruction on Defendant’s Statements Not Required Sua Sponte
July 26th, 2016

In People v. Diaz (2015) 60 C4th 1176 the California Supreme Court reconsidered the requirement that the cautionary principle reflected in CALJIC 2.71.7 [now CC 358] must be given sua sponte. The Court decided that “in light of a change in the law that requires the general instructions on witness credibility to be given sua […]


Tags: , ,


Judge Has Sua Sponte duty to Give Cautionary Instruction re: Jury Conduct But Standard of Prejudice Not Resolved
July 19th, 2016

In People v. Carter (2010) 182 CA4th 522, 531-534 the reviewing court held that the failure to give CC 101 sua sponte was error. However, the parties disagreed on whether the harmless error analysis should be governed by People v. Watson (1956) 46 Cal.2d 818, 836 [not reasonably probable a more favorable result would have […]


Tags: , , , , ,


When Is A Possession Of Property Owned By Another A Victim Of Robbery
September 18th, 2015

People v. Scott (2009) 45 Cal. 4th 743, 751-757, discussed the language in CC 1600 dealing with constructive possession of property by store employees. Scott disapproved the Court of Appeal’s opinion in People v. Frazer (2003) 106 Cal. App. 4th 1105, to the extent that Frazer found that courts should adopt a narrow view regarding […]


Tags: , , , ,


Reasonableness Of Victim’s Fear: Request For Instruction As Defense Theory
September 14th, 2015

People v. Morehead (2011) 191 Cal. App. 4th 765, held that CC 1600 was not invalid for failing to instruct the jury that a robbery victim’s fear must be reasonable. Morehead simply held that the court does not have a sua sponte duty to instruct the jury that a robbery victim’s fear must be reasonable. […]


Tags: , , , ,


Accident as Defense Theory: Not Required Sua Sponte
June 12th, 2015

  When the defense theory of accident is an attempt to negate the intent element of the crime, the trial judge has no sua sponte duty to give CC 3404. (CC 3404 Bench Notes, Citing People v. Anderson (2011) 51 Cal. 4th 989, 997-998.)


Tags: , , , ,