How have courts interpreted special instruction in a case involving a defendant's hospital statement to a police officer?

On appeal, Naly complains that the trial court's special instruction, as read, is an incorrect statement of the law. We disagree. As respondent points out, the trial court's instruction parallels CALJIC Former No. 14.55 and correctly states the objective standard of determining whether defendants had reached a place of temporary safety based upon all the surrounding circumstances. (People v. Johnson, supra, 5 Cal.App.4th 552, 559-560, 7 Cal.Rptr.2d 23.)

THE TRIAL COURT PROPERLY ADMITTED THONGVILAY'S HOSPITAL STATEMENT TO OFFICER CLARK