In what circumstances will a jury be instructed by counsel that it must reach its verdict without any consideration of punishment?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Lopez, F065052 (Cal. App. 2014):
We note also that the jury was eventually instructed following argument by counsel, pursuant to CALCRIM No. 3550, that it must reach its verdict without any consideration of punishment. Absent evidence to the contrary, we presume the jurors followed the court's instruction. (People v. Yeoman (2003) 31 Cal.4th 93, 139.)
"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
Can a defendant argue that the instruction "In reaching your verdict" improperly implies that the jury is obligated to reach a verdict in the case? (California, United States of America)
Is a criminal offence punishable by section 654 (a) of the Criminal Code of Ontario's Criminal Code punishable by Section 654, subdivision (a), punishable by the same law, punishable by a different law? (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)
Does Counsel's failure to object to either instruction or instruction to the jury at trial affect a claim against Reed's counsel? (California, United States of America)
When there is no substantial evidence to warrant a self-defense instruction, does McNeely's contention that counsel's failure to request the instruction constitute ineffective assistance of counsel? (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)
If counsel discovered that the burglary had been reduced to a misdemeanor, and lodged an objection below, would counsel have discovered that counsel had discovered that Counsel had discovered it was a misdemeanor? (California, United States of America)
Can defense counsel argue that defense counsel failed to object to the foregoing procedure or request that written instructions be provided to the jury? (California, United States of America)
Is a prosecutor's comment that defense counsel was seeking to "distract the jury from the evidence as an attack on counsel's integrity a fair response to defense counsel's remarks? (California, United States of America)
Does the standard instruction "totality of the aggravating and mitigating circumstances" apply to a single mitigating circumstance? (California, United States of America)
