When one of the theories presented to the jury is factually inadequate, such as the factually incomplete, does the court have to be able to affirm a jury verdict based solely on the unsupported theory?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. Perez, 113 P.3d 100, 29 Cal.Rptr.3d 423, 35 Cal.4th 1219 (Cal. 2005):

In contrast, when one of the theories presented to a jury is factually inadequate, such as a theory that, while legally correct, has no application to the facts of the case, we apply a different standard. (See People v. Guiton, supra, 4 Cal.4th at pp. 1129-1130, 17 Cal.Rptr.2d 365, 847 P.2d 45.) In that instance, we must assess the entire record, "including the facts and the instructions, the arguments of counsel, any communications from the jury during deliberations, and the entire verdict." (Id. at p. 1130, 17 Cal.Rptr.2d 365, 847 P.2d 45.) We will affirm "unless a review of the entire record affirmatively demonstrates a reasonable probability that the jury in fact found the defendant guilty solely on the unsupported theory." (Ibid.)

Other Questions


What is the test for affirming a jury verdict when one of the theories presented to the jury is factually inadequate? (California, United States of America)
When a factual determination is challenged by an appellate court on the grounds that there is no substantial evidence to sustain it, does the appellate court have power to substitute its factual determination for that factual determination? (California, United States of America)
How have the courts interpreted the prosecutor's statement that the jury's verdict must be based on the evidence presented in court? (California, United States of America)
Whether a court's ruling is based on oral testimony or written declarations, when conflicting inferences can reasonably be drawn from the facts, can the appellate court defer to the trial court's factual determinations? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted comments made by a prosecutor in a civil case where the prosecutor suggested that the prosecutor's theories were not the exclusive theories that may be considered by the court? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for determining whether there was prejudice when a trial court instructs on a factually unsupported theory of conviction? (California, United States of America)
When a factual determination is challenged by an appellate court on the grounds that there is no substantial evidence to sustain it, does the appellate court have power to substitute its deductions for those of the trial court? (California, United States of America)
How have courts dealt with the situation where the verdict form signed by the jury is different in some respect from the verdict as declared and acknowledged in open court? (California, United States of America)
When a factual determination is challenged by an appellate court on the grounds that there is no substantial evidence to sustain it, can the appellate court substitute its deductions for those of the trial court? (California, United States of America)
In what circumstances will a prospective jury at a jury trial be able to reach a verdict based solely on the evidence presented at trial? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.