California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Reliford, 130 Cal.Rptr.2d 254, 29 Cal.4th 1007, 62 P.3d 601 (Cal. 2003):
The instruction's italicized sentence is potentially misleading. It suggests that the jury can rely on a defendant's prior sexual offense as the sole basis for convicting him of the charged offense, so long as the jury finds the prior offense true by a higher standard of proof than preponderance of the evidence. To the contrary, a prior offense, standing alone, is legally insufficient to sustain a conviction for the charged offense, as we explained in People v. Falsetta (1999) 21 Cal.4th 903, 89 Cal. Rptr.2d 847, 986 P.2d 182. There, we said that when the prosecution in a case charging the defendant with a sex offense relies on evidence that the defendant committed other sexual offenses, the evidence of the other offenses "is not sufficient by itself to prove his commission of the charged offense. ..." (Id at p. 920, 89 Cal.Rptr.2d 847, 986 P.2d 182.)
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.