What is the burden of proving the existence of a recorded permit in any of the codefendants' names?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Yoshimura, 154 Cal.Rptr. 314, 91 Cal.App.3d 609 (Cal. App. 1979):
The existence of a recorded permit in any of these names would require the People to eliminate each codefendant as the holder. The burden of proving such negatives is precisely what the rule of convenience is designed to avoid. (People v. Montalvo, supra, 4 Cal.3d 328 at p. 334, 93 Cal.Rptr. 581, 482 P.2d 205.) In the implausible if not preposterous event that appellant had an exonerating permit, the fact was "peculiarly within her knowledge" and there was nothing "harsh or unfair" in making her bear the burden of proving it. (Ibid.) The trial court did not err in refusing her instructions to the effect that the People bore the burden of proving the contrary.
(3) People's Exhibit 99
"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.
