How have the courts interpreted jury instructions in a sexual assault case?

Appellant informs us when there is a discrepancy between the oral and written instructions, we must presume the jury was guided by the written instructions. (People v. Sparks (2002) 28 Cal.4th 71, 75, fn. 3.) However, we find the principle does not apply here. There were no significant discrepancies between the trial court's written and oral instructions. We view the jury instructions as a whole and in the light of the trial court's oral instructions and the prosecutor's final argument. In the circumstances, the jury would have been well aware the abuse must take place "under circumstances likely to produce great bodily harm or death." There was no error or constitutional violation.

(b) Providing a further explanation as to the term "great bodily harm."