Is there any reversible error between the written and oral instructions of a jury?

In People v. Mills (2010) 48 Cal.4th 158, our high court rejected a similar claim with reasoning that applies equally in this case: "The risk of a discrepancy between the orally delivered and the written instructions exists in every trial, and verdicts are not undermined by the mere fact the trial court misspoke. 'We of course presume "that jurors understand and follow the court's instructions." [Citation.] This presumption includes the written instructions. [Citation.] To the extent a discrepancy exists between the written and oral versions of jury instructions, the written instructions provided to the jury will control.' [Citation.] Because the jury was given the correctly worded instructions in

Page 21

written form and instructed . . . that '[y]ou are to be governed only by the instruction in its final wording,' and because on appeal we give precedence to the written instructions, we find no reversible error." (People v. Mills, at pp. 200-201.) Here, the court instructed the jury similarly with CALCRIM No. 200, telling the jurors that it would give them a copy of the instruction that may be printed, typed or written, and they were to "[o]nly consider the final version of the instructions in your deliberations." We conclude, as in Mills, the court here did not commit reversible error, structural or otherwise.