Can a jury reasonably deduce from the evidence?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Crawford, B267354 (Cal. App. 2016):
could reasonably deduce from the evidence.' (People v. Kraft (2000) 23 Cal.4th 978, 1053 [99 Cal.Rptr.2d 1, 5 P.3d 68].)" (People v. Edwards (2013) 57 Cal.4th 658, 715.)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
What is the test for evidence that the appellant could reasonably reasonably reasonably expect the appellant to have knowledge of a crime? (California, United States of America)
Can a judge overturn a finding that the evidence supports a judgment the trier of fact could have reasonably deduced from the evidence? (California, United States of America)
When a conviction for sexual assault is based primarily on circumstantial evidence, does the court have to presume every fact the trier could reasonably deduce from the evidence? (California, United States of America)
When the evidence is sufficient to sustain some but not all alleged damages, when the evidence does not support all of the damages, will the court reduce the judgment to the amount supported by the evidence? (California, United States of America)
Does the Court have authority to exclude evidence where a defendant has been found to be contrary to the evidence code under section 352 of the California Evidence Code? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for accepting as true all evidence and all reasonable inferences from the evidence? (California, United States of America)
Does the absence of lingering doubt from a recitation of evidence the defense offered in an attempt to raise reasonable doubt raise a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
What is the difference between a reasonable and unreasonable plaintiff and a reasonable plaintiff under a "reasonable implied assumption of risk" approach? (California, United States of America)
Does a competent, unconflicted counsel who submitted on the evidence at the preliminary hearing, should have argued to the trial court that this evidence did not establish the lawful duty element beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
Does the evidence support the finding that there was insufficient evidence to support a finding that the sexual assault charges against Backman were not supported by the weight of the evidence? (California, United States of America)
