Can misinstruction on an element of the crime or special circumstance be considered harmless error analysis?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Hernandez, 249 Cal.Rptr. 850, 46 Cal.3d 194, 757 P.2d 1013 (Cal. 1988):
It is true, as we have recently held, that misinstruction on an element of an offense or special circumstance may be subject to a harmless error analysis under the standard of Chapman v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 18, 21, 87 S.Ct. 824, 826, 17 L.Ed.2d 705. (See, e.g., People v. Odle (1988) 45 Cal.3d 386, 412-415, 247 Cal.Rptr. 137, 754 P.2d 184 [knowledge that victim was a peace
Page 860
"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 need to be told that the element of offense is not a given, not a required element, and that the omission of that element is a harmless error? (California, United States of America)
In what circumstances will a jury consider each crime and the relevant evidence in the order in which each crime should be considered? (California, United States of America)
Is omitting an element of the offense in jury instructions subject to harmless error analysis? (California, United States of America)
Is it sufficient for the jury to consider the error in finding that the jury considered evidence from which it could have come to a verdict without reliance on reliance on the error? (California, United States of America)
Does the amendment to the lying-in-wait special circumstance in a murder case in which there is a distinction between the special circumstance and lying in-wait first degree murder? (California, United States of America)
Does a finding of intent to inflict pain and suffering need to be considered as an element of a special-circumstance finding? (California, United States of America)
If a defendant harbored the intent to kill at the outset, and committed the same crime at the start of the crime, will the special circumstance apply? (California, United States of America)
When faced with a prosecutor's comment that a defendant's refusal to testify may constitute a harmless error, is this harmless error? (California, United States of America)
How have the courts treated the defense's request for a special instruction against "double counting" the crimes and the special circumstances? (California, United States of America)
When faced with a prosecutor's comment that a defendant's refusal to testify may constitute a harmless error, is this harmless error? (California, United States of America)
