In what circumstances will the error in CALCRIM No. 400 be deemed harmless beyond a reasonable doubt?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Britt, B218965, Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. TA098926 (Cal. App. 2011):
In Samaniego, in concluding the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt (i.e., the verdict would not have been different) because the jury necessarily resolved the issue of the aider and abettor's mental state under properly given instructions, the court noted: "It would be virtually impossible for a person to know of another's intent to murder and decide to aid in accomplishing the crime without at least a brief period of deliberation and premeditation, which is all that is required." (People v. Samaniego, supra, 172 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1165-1166.) Thus, any error in CALCRIM No. 400 as given was harmless.
Page 24
"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.
