In determining whether a Section 1170.95 sex offender has made a prima facie showing of entitlement to relief, does the trial court have to consider the jury instructions given at the petitioner's trial?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Castro, B304473 (Cal. App. 2020):
Many Court of Appeal decisions have held that in determining whether a Section 1170.95 petitioner has made a prima facie showing of entitlement to relief, the trial court may consider the record of conviction, including the jury instructions given at the petitioner's trial. (See, e.g., People v. Soto (2020) 51 Cal.App.5th 1043, 1055 (Soto), review
Page 10
"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
In determining whether the trial court erred in instructing the jury in a case, what is the test for interpreting the instructions as a whole? (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)
What evidence does the Ontario Court of Appeal need to consider to determine whether a widow entitled to a pension is entitled to receive the pension from her dependent? (California, United States of America)
Does the Attorney General's response conceding that petitioner has made a prima facie showing for relief from default constitute an agreement that the requested relief ought to be granted without further proceedings? (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)
Whether a court's ruling is based on oral testimony or written declarations, when conflicting inferences can reasonably be drawn from the facts, can the appellate court defer to the trial court's factual determinations? (California, United States of America)
When a factual determination is challenged by an appellate court on the grounds that there is no substantial evidence to sustain it, can the appellate court substitute its deductions for those of 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 de novo standard of review applied to determine whether the trial court erred in failing to instruct on a lesser included offense? (California, United States of America)
How have the courts interpreted jury instructions in determining whether a razor blade is a deadly weapon under section 4574 of the Criminal Code? (California, United States of America)
