Is it an error for the trial court to instruct the jury that section 273a, subdivision (1) requires specific intent?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Pointer, 151 Cal.App.3d 1128, 199 Cal.Rptr. 357 (Cal. App. 1984):
For the foregoing reasons, we reaffirm the recent holding in People v. Northrop, supra, and the earlier cases upon which it relies, that it would have been error for the trial court to instruct the jury that section 273a, subdivision (1), requires specific intent to inflict the harm referred to in the statute.
[151 Cal.App.3d 1136]
"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
Is there any instructional error in general criminal intent instruction used by the trial court to include counts 4 and 7 in the General Criminal intent instruction? (California, United States of America)
What is the basis for a finding of error in a trial court's refusal to instruct a jury to instruct on unanimity in a case where there were three distinct threats that could have constituted violations of section 422 of the Criminal Code? (California, United States of America)
Is there any error or error in an instruction given by the Court in the context of specific intent in the definition of first degree murder? (California, United States of America)
Does a court's failure to instruct on the specific intent required for a conviction on a theft theory constitute an error? (California, United States of America)
Is it a federal error that crime requires general not specific intent rather than specific intent? (California, United States of America)
Is a jury's instruction that a crime requires specific intent not specific intent invalidating a defendant's due process under the US Constitution? (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)
Can an appellant seek review of an instruction in the Superior Court of Appeal where the original instruction was found to have made errors that could have been cured in the trial court? (California, United States of America)
In what circumstances will the courts interpret section 278.5 of the California Penal Code as requiring the state to prove specific intent? (California, United States of America)
Does a trial court have to satisfy the requirements of section 654 of the California Criminal Code by sentencing a defendant to time served on a charge of assault with intent to rape? (California, United States of America)
