Does a trial court have a duty to instruct the jury on single versus multiple conspiracies?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. Maddox, B234514 (Cal. App. 2014):

"California intermediate appellate courts are presently divided on whether the trial court has a duty to instruct the jury on single versus multiple conspiracies. [Citations.]" (People v. Meneses, supra, 165 Cal.App.4th at p. 1668.) Most decisions, including the most recent cases, have held the trial court has a duty to instruct the jury to decide whether there was a single or multiple conspiracies where there is evidence to support alternative findings. (See, e.g., id. at p. 1671; People v. Jasso (2006) 142 Cal.App.4th 1213, 1220.)

Other Questions


Does a trial court have a sua sponte duty to specifically instruct jurors on single versus multiple conspiracies? (California, United States of America)
What is the standard of review applied by appellate courts to a decision by a trial court to instruct or not to instruct a jury? (California, United States of America)
When a defendant makes a mid-trial motion to revoke his self represented status and have standby counsel appointed for the remainder of the trial, does the trial court have a duty to manage the trial? (California, United States of America)
Is there any instructional error in general criminal intent instruction used by the trial court to include counts 4 and 7 in the General Criminal intent instruction? (California, United States of America)
In what circumstances will the jury be instructed to follow the law as instructed, rather than consider any comments by the prosecutor that conflicted with the trial court's instructions? (California, United States of America)
Can an appellant seek review of an instruction in the Superior Court of Appeal where the original instruction was found to have made errors that could have been cured in the trial court? (California, United States of America)
When a factual determination is challenged by an appellate court on the grounds that there is no substantial evidence to sustain it, can the appellate court substitute its deductions for those of the trial court? (California, United States of America)
Does a defendant have any grounds to argue that the trial court erred in failing to give the cautionary instruction at the end of trial? (California, United States of America)
What are the findings of the California Superior Court of Appeal on the grounds that the instructions given by defendant in his conspiracy to commit felony murder were not tantamount to felony murder instructions? (California, United States of America)
How have courts treated a defendant's claim that the trial court erred by refusing to instruct on the elements of rape and sodomy generally? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.