What is the test for instructing a jury on "the principles of law commonly or closely and openly connected with the facts of the case"?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Martinez, C084834 (Cal. App. 2020):
A trial court must instruct the jury on " 'those principles of law commonly or closely and openly connected with the facts of the case before the court.' " (People v. Hood (1969) 1 Cal.3d 444, 449.) Those principles of law include all the elements of the charged offenses and enhancements. (People v. Williams (2009) 170 Cal.App.4th 587, 638-639.)
"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
Does a jury have a duty to instruct sua sponte on the principles of law that are closely and openly connected with the facts before the jury? (California, United States of America)
Does a jury have a duty to instruct sua sponte on the principles of law that are closely and openly connected with the facts before the jury? (California, United States of America)
Is a jury required to instruct on "general principles of law that are commonly and openly connected to the facts before the jury"? (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)
How does the prosecution in a civil case establish that there is a connection between a group of individuals with a common name, common identifying symbols and a common enemy? (California, United States of America)
When a judge refers to "common sense, common-sense, popular parlance" or "common-sense", does this mean that the judge must be able to rely solely on common sense or common- sense? (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 a defendant's duty of counsel in a criminal case to instruct a jury on the principles of law relevant to their understanding of the case? (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)
Is it instructional error to instruct a jury in a trial trial on a defense that is not relevant to the facts of the case? (California, United States of America)
