California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Padilla, B256033 (Cal. App. 2015):
Even had the trial court had erred in failing to instruct the jury on self-defense or imperfect self defense, any such error was harmless. "'A judgment will not be reversed for error[] in jury instructions unless it appears reasonably probable that, absent the error, the jury would have rendered a verdict more favorable to the appellant. [Citation.]' [Citation.]" (Scott v. Rayhrer (2010) 185 Cal.App.4th 1535, 1540; People v. Watson (1956) 46 Cal.2d 818, 836 [reasonable probability of a more favorable result standard].)
Page 16
Defendant contends that Chapman v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 18, 24 [harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard] applies here. Under either standard the error was harmless. The evidence of defendant's guilt of murder is overwhelming. The evidence in the record shows that defendant shot Jesus after the fighting had stopped, defendant's companions had been ejected from the site of the birthday party, and defendant and his companions were not in imminent danger of being killed or suffering great bodily injury.
The judgment is affirmed.
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.