In what circumstances will the jury consider whether or not to convict appellant of a charge of possessing materials with intent to pervert the course of justice?

As in several prior cases, we find no error in giving the challenged instruction, which left it to the jury to decide whether any misleading statements were made, and if so, what weight should be given to the evidence. [Citations.]" (People v. Medina (1995) 11 Cal.4th 694, 762.) The jury here could determine for themselves whether the lie about his name concerned the materials appellant kept in his apartment. Nor did the prosecution's argument misconstrue this permissible inference, as the prosecutor did not argue that the jury could infer guilt about the charged crimes solely because appellant lied for any reason. Rather, the prosecutor vaguely argued that the lie reflected a consciousness of guilt, and referred the jury to the instruction.