Does the prosecution have established one or more elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Jenkins, A136340 (Cal. App. 2014):
Payton relies on two federal cases in which a trial court expressed the opinion that the prosecution had established one or more elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt, even though the elements were disputed. In United States v. Murdock (1933) 290 U.S. 389, the trial court told the jury, " 'I want to instruct you that whatever the court
Page 9
"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 establishing the elements of the crime or special circumstances beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
Does the doctrine of reasonable doubt apply to a defendant's due process right to appeal against a jury verdict that diminished the prosecution's burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
What is the standard for determining whether a reasonable trier of fact could have found the essential elements of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
What is the prosecution's burden to prove every element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
What is the prosecution's burden to prove every element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for establishing that a rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
Is it improper for a prosecutor to misstate the law generally and particularly the prosecution's burden of proving every element of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
Can a reasonable trier of fact have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for establishing that a rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of a crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt? (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)
