How have courts interpreted section 136.1 of the California Code of Civil Procedure on a motion for judgment of acquittal?

Defense counsel made his position on the definition of "law enforcement" in section 136.1 clear during the motion for judgment of acquittal; his position being that "law enforcement" does not include parents. The trial court denied the motion, thereby rejecting defense counsel's interpretation of the law. Because the trial court had already rejected defense counsel's interpretation of the law, an objection to the proposed answer on the same basis, e.g., that the trial court should tell the jury the definition of "law enforcement" does not include parents, would have been futile. We are not persuaded that defendant forfeited the issue; repeating his argument about the definition of "law enforcement" would not have been fruitful. (See People v. McKinnon (2011) 52 Cal.4th 610, 654 [repeating same unsuccessful objection would be futile].)

Page 17