Does a jury have a duty to instruct on the formal legal elements of conspiracy?

But the People did not claim Rodriguez is vicariously liable for the acts of some third person. The evidence showed he was the direct perpetrator of the offenses of which he was convicted. With the possible exception of the admission of the first two telephone recordings, the existence of a conspiracy was never a material issue in the case. The jury was perfectly capable of determining whether gang culture gave Rodriguez the intent and motivation to kill without an instruction on the formal legal elements of conspiracy. An instruction on the formal elements of conspiracy was not "necessary for the jury's understanding of the case." (People v. Montoya, supra, 7 Cal.4th at p. 1047.) Thus the trial court did not have a sua sponte duty to instruct on conspiracy. (Ibid.)

Page 8