Does the court have a sua sponte duty to instruct the jeopardy jury on reasonable doubt?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. West, A152085 (Cal. App. 2020):
Neither West nor the People asked the court to instruct the jeopardy jury on the reasonable doubt standard. West raises the issue for the first time on appeal and argues the court had a sua sponte duty to instruct on reasonable doubt because it constitutes a legal " ' "principle[] closely and openly connected with the facts before the court, and which [is] necessary for the jury's understanding of the case." ' " (People v. Breverman (1998) 19 Cal.4th 142, 154.)
"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
Does the court have a sua sponte duty to instruct the jeopardy jury on reasonable doubt? (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)
Is the reasonable doubt instruction insufficient to support the definition of reasonable doubt in CALCRIM No. 220? (California, United States of America)
Is the reasonable doubt instruction insufficient to support the definition of reasonable doubt in CALCRIM No. 220? (California, United States of America)
What are the consequences of the Court's failure to instruct on an instructing on a harmless beyond a reasonable doubt finding? (California, United States of America)
Does the absence of an instruction defining reasonable doubt result in a jury failing to apply the same reasonable doubt test? (California, United States of America)
How has the court interpreted the reasonable doubt instruction in a civil case? (California, United States of America)
Does the California Superior Court have authority to the effect that any fair, reasonable doubt concerning the existence of a municipal corporation's eminent domain power is resolved by the courts against the corporation? (California, United States of America)
Does a defendant have grounds to argue that a trial court prejudicially errs in failing to instruct the jury sua sponte at the penalty phase to disregard the no-sympathy instruction at the guilt phase? (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)
