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

The following excerpt is from People v. Wallis, H044215 (Cal. App. 2018):

Even assuming the trial court erred by including counts 4 and 7 in the general criminal intent instruction, any instructional error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt in light of the jury instructions given on the elements of child endangerment, which properly informed the jury that it could not convict defendant unless it found he was criminally negligent. (See Chapman v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 18, 24.)

Other Questions

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)
How have we dealt with the Attorney General's contention that a defendant forfeited any claim of error by failing to object or request modification to an instruction in the trial court? (California, United States of America)
What is the duty of a trial court to instruct a jury on the general principles of law relevant to the issues raised by the trial? (California, United States of America)
How have courts treated a defendant's claim that the trial court erred by refusing to instruct on the elements of rape and sodomy generally? (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)
How have the Attorney General argued that the Court of Appeal invited error in giving instructions on application of the reasonable doubt principle to a lesser included homicide defendant? (California, United States of America)
Is a trial court error in failing to instruct on the need to find intent to kill deemed harmless? (California, United States of America)
Does a party have to complain to the Court on appeal that an instruction in a criminal case instructing a jury to convict a defendant of possessing all six firearms was "too general or incomplete"? (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 harmless error analysis that a reviewing court should use when a trial court's jury instructions incorrectly define an element of a charged offense? (California, United States of America)

Whitelogo nobg 300dpi sm

"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.