Does Cal.CALCRIM No. 301 instruct the jury the testimony of a single witness can prove any fact?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Legaspi, F065549 (Cal. App. 2014):
CALCRIM No. 301 instructs the jury the testimony of a single witness can prove any fact, but warns the jury to review carefully all the evidence before accepting the testimony of a single witness.3 The trial court has a sua sponte duty to instruct the jury with this instruction in every case. (People v. Rincon-Pineda (1975) 14 Cal.3d 864, 885.) The trial court failed to do so here.
"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
Is a single witness testimony sufficient to prove any fact? (California, United States of America)
Does the Court have to grant immunity to a witness who testified in a witness testimony that the testimony was inconsistent with the instructions? (California, United States of America)
Can a trier of fact rely on the testimony of a single witness? (California, United States of America)
What is the state prosecutor's argument that only the testimony of a single witness is sufficient for the proof of any fact? (California, United States of America)
Can a prosecutor argue that a single witness is sufficient to prove a fact? (California, United States of America)
Is a witness who gives evidence at a joint trial considered a witness against a defendant if the jury is instructed to consider that testimony only against a codefendant? (California, United States of America)
Does the Attorney General have any authority or authority to instruct a jury to disregard an instruction in an assault case where the instruction had no antecedent in the facts? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for a court to accept testimony from a witness in a witness testimony? (California, United States of America)
Is a witness who gives evidence at a joint trial considered a witness against a defendant if the jury is instructed to consider that testimony only against a codefendant? (California, United States of America)
Is there any ambiguity or technical inconsistency in instructions that only one witness's testimony is sufficient for proof of any fact? (California, United States of America)
