California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Wright, 248 Cal.Rptr. 600, 45 Cal.3d 1126, 755 P.2d 1049 (Cal. 1988):
15 Defendant's requested instruction omits some of the factors listed in CALJIC No. 2.92. Because we hold it was harmless error to fail to give any instruction at all on the factors relevant to eyewitness identifications, we need not discuss whether it was error to decline to instruct the jury respecting factors not listed in the requested instruction. (Cf. People v. Coates, supra, 152 Cal.App.3d 665, 670-671, 199 Cal.Rptr. 675 [finding it was not error to reject a requested instruction which was improper as drafted, but that it was error to fail to cure the inadequacy of the requested instruction and give a properly tailored instruction, the court engaged in a harmless error analysis on the latter error].)
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.