Does a court have to provide an instruction as to the meaning of a phrase that is commonly understood by those familiar with the English language?

The court did not err. When, as here, a phrase "is commonly understood by those familiar with the English language and is not used in a technical [4 Cal.4th 271] sense peculiar to the law, the court is not required to give an instruction as to its meaning in the absence of a request." (People v. Bonin (1988) 46 Cal.3d 659, 698, 250 Cal.Rptr. 687, 758 P.2d 1217.) As noted, there was no such request. (Compare People v. Guzman (1988) 45 Cal.3d 915, 949-952, 248 Cal.Rptr. 467, 755 P.2d 917 [concluding that a similar instructional omission was nonerroneous on a similar record].) ⁹