California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Padilla, 11 Cal.4th 891, 47 Cal.Rptr.2d 426, 906 P.2d 388 (Cal. 1995):
In the instances cited by defendant, the omissions were not prejudicial because the record "is adequate to permit defendant to argue each of the points purportedly addressed in the unreported conferences." (People v. Howard, supra, 1 Cal.4th at p. 1165, 5 Cal.Rptr.2d 268, 824 P.2d 1315.) With respect to defendant's assertion that he was prejudiced by the failure to transcribe discussions of jury instructions, for example, the record discloses that the trial court indicated on the record that defense counsel was "not going to approve the instructions," and that defendant's trial counsel then stated for the record that all instructions he had requested had been given: "I am willing to say all the instructions I have offered have been given, if that is of any benefit. I mean that is clearly in the record ... the fact that you gave them."
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.