Can a jury overturn a finding of domestic violence resulting in a traumatic condition?

Since the protective order is not a form of punishment, the trial court could make the abuse/bodily injury finding, rather than the jury. (Apprendi v. New Jersey, supra, 530 U.S. at p. 490 [a jury is required when the facts at issue increase the penalty for a crime].)

Page 20

We now address the People's assertion that the evidence supports finding defendant's crime of battery falls within the statutory definition of domestic violence. Defendant was charged with inflicting injury, resulting in a traumatic condition, on a cohabitant. ( 273.5, subd. (a).) A "'traumatic condition'" includes minor wounds. ( 273.5, subd. (d).) The jury found defendant guilty of the lesser included offense of domestic battery. ( 243, subd. (e)(1).) Since the jury rejected the injury/traumatic condition finding, the trial court could not contradict that finding in order to impose the protective order. In other words, the trial court could not impose the protective order because it found the victim suffered bodily injury. (See People v. Siko (1988) 45 Cal.3d 820, 823-826 [trial court cannot contradict a jury's findings when analyzing section 654 issue].)