What is the effect of challenged language in the CALJIC No. 5.55 instructions on self-defense and unreasonable self-defence?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from The People v. Thompson, A120613, A123062, Super. Ct. No. C151836 (Cal. App. 2010):
Even if the instruction using language in CALJIC No. 5.55 should not have been given, we find no prejudice. The challenged language was just a portion of eighteen instructions on self-defense and unreasonable self-defense, "some of which were mutually exclusive. It was obvious to anyone that not all of those instructions could apply to the case____" (People v. Olguin (1994) 31 Cal.App.4th 1355, 1381.) The jurors were
Page 37
"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
What is the effect of challenged instruction in the context of the "jury likely to have done" in the absence of the challenged instruction? (California, United States of America)
What is the effect of an instruction in a motor vehicle accident where an instruction is qualified by language substantially as given in the instant action? (California, United States of America)
Does a defendant's failure to object or request clarifying or corrective language in a jury instruction forfeit an appellate challenge to that instruction? (California, United States of America)
Is a Defendant's failure to object or request a clarifying instruction below forfeits his ability to challenge the given instruction? (California, United States of America)
What is the effect of language in a jury instruction that refers to a violation of section 487 of the Penal Code? (California, United States of America)
Does a jury need to be instructed in English as well as the language used by the court to instruct the jury in English? (California, United States of America)
Is there any case law where a jury has been instructed to use the same or similar language as the standard instructions in a personal injury case? (California, United States of America)
What is the effect of the Court of Appeal's failure to provide a standard burden of proof instruction such as CALJIC 2.90? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for a defendant to argue that a trial court commits prejudicial error by instructing in the language of CALJIC No.51 that motive is not an element of the crime charged? (California, United States of America)
Does the Attorney General have any authority or authority to instruct a jury to disregard an instruction in an assault case where the instruction had no antecedent in the facts? (California, United States of America)
