How have courts dealt with a mistake in the form of a verdict in a case where the jury was instructed on the correct section of the Penal Code reference?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Rattanapan, G054176 (Cal. App. 2017):
violated by this conduct as section 288a, subdivison (b)(2), instead of section 289, subdivision (i). Again, the mistake on the verdict form was harmless. The jury was properly instructed on the essential elements of each crime. (People v. Escarcega (1969) 273 Cal.App.2d 853, 857-858 [verdict stated wrong Penal Code reference but jury was instructed on correct offense].)
"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
How have courts dealt with the situation where the verdict form signed by the jury is different in some respect from the verdict as declared and acknowledged in open court? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted section 1016.5 of the California Immigration Code and how have the courts interpreted the word 'court' in that section? (California, United States of America)
Does section 654 of the California Penal Code allow for an act or omission that is punishable by different sections of the Penal Code to be punished by one or more sections? (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)
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)
What is the effect of language in a jury instruction that refers to a violation of section 487 of the Penal Code? (California, United States of America)
Does section 190.3 of the California Penal Code require a trial court to instruct that certain sentencing factors (d), (e), (f) and (h) are relevant only as potential mitigators? (California, United States of America)
How have the courts dealt with motions to suppress and set aside information pursuant to section 995 of the Penal Code? (California, United States of America)
For the purposes of section 1108.2(1) of the California Criminal Code, is there any constitutional error in a trial court's decision to instruct the jury in a sexual assault case to consider the use of sexual assault evidence admitted under Section 1108? (California, United States of America)
Can a defendant who objected to an instruction and verdict form referencing a lying-in-wait theory of first degree murder continue to oppose the instruction and the verdict forms? (California, United States of America)
