Does a trial court have a sua sponte duty to specifically instruct jurors on single versus multiple conspiracies?

California, United States of America

The following excerpt is from People v. Thompson, B226776 (Cal. App. 2012):

Published opinions by our state's intermediate appellate courts are divided on the issue whether a trial court has a sua sponte duty to specifically instruct jurors "on single versus multiple conspiracies." (See People v. Meneses (2008) 165 Cal.App.4th 1648, 1668-1669 [surveying cases].) One line of cases imposes such a duty on the reasoning that the existence of a conspiracy "'must be determined by reference to the agreement which embraces and defines its objects. Whether the object of a single agreement is to commit one or many crimes, it is in either case that [single] agreement which constitutes

Page 56

"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Try it today free of charge!

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 trial court have a duty to instruct the jury on single versus multiple conspiracies? (California, United States of America)

Does a trial court have a sua sponte obligation to give unanimity instruction on the statute of limitations in a conspiracy? (California, United States of America)

Does a defendant have grounds to argue that a trial court prejudicially errs in failing to instruct the jury sua sponte at the penalty phase to disregard the no-sympathy instruction at the guilt phase? (California, United States of America)

Is there any instructional error in general criminal intent instruction used by the trial court to include counts 4 and 7 in the General Criminal intent instruction? (California, United States of America)

Is a juror declaration inadmissible when one or more jurors failed to follow the trial court's instructions? (California, United States of America)

In what circumstances will the jury be instructed to follow the law as instructed, rather than consider any comments by the prosecutor that conflicted with the trial court's instructions? (California, United States of America)

When a defendant makes a mid-trial motion to revoke his self represented status and have standby counsel appointed for the remainder of the trial, does the trial court have a duty to manage the trial? (California, United States of America)

What is the standard of review applied by appellate courts to a decision by a trial court to instruct or not to instruct a jury? (California, United States of America)

Can an appellant seek review of an instruction in the Superior Court of Appeal where the original instruction was found to have made errors that could have been cured in the trial court? (California, United States of America)

How have courts interpreted the principles defining a trial court's duty to instruct sua sponte on defense? (California, United States of America)

Does a trial court have a sua sponte duty to specifically instruct jurors on single versus multiple conspiracies?

"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Other Questions

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.

Company

Product

Resources