How have the jury been instructed to consider the elements of rape and forcible oral copulation separately?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. Johnson, A139190 (Cal. App. 2015):

The jury was instructed to consider each charge separately (CALCRIM No. 3515). As noted ante, the instruction given on consideration of the prior sex offense evidence specifically directed its consideration to the current forcible rape and forcible oral copulation charges, and was given immediately following the instructions on the elements of rape and forcible oral copulation. The jury was also instructed to follow the court's instructions on the law if they conflicted with any statements made by counsel (CALCRIM No. 200). "[T]he 'court's instructions, not the prosecution's argument, are determinative, for "[w]e presume that jurors treat the court's instructions as a statement of the law by a judge, and the prosecutor's comments as words spoken by an advocate in an attempt to persuade." ' [Citation.]" (People v. Mendoza (2000) 24 Cal.4th 130, 173.)

Page 23

Other Questions


Does a forcible sex crime have to be considered a non-forcible sex crime under the elements test? (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 a defendant who requests instruction on a lesser-related charge of assault that includes the elements of implied malice murder be able to complain about the second degree murder instruction on appeal? (California, United States of America)
Is gross unfairness a factor in defendant's claim that the jury was not instructed to consider each charge separately? (California, United States of America)
Is a witness who gives evidence at a joint trial considered a witness against a defendant if the jury is instructed to consider that testimony only against a codefendant? (California, United States of America)
Does a trial court have a duty to give an instruction that the prosecution substantially relies on circumstantial evidence to establish any element of the crime including the element of intent? (California, United States of America)
How should a jury be instructed to consider any aspect of the crimes that were part and parcel of the elements of first degree murder as aggravating? (California, United States of America)
What is the consequence of a prosecutor's failure to instruct appellant to consider each count separately? (California, United States of America)
Does the Attorney General have any authority or authority to instruct a jury to disregard an instruction in an assault case where the instruction had no antecedent in the facts? (California, United States of America)
Is gross unfairness a factor in defendant's claim that the jury was not instructed to consider each charge separately? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.