What is the burden of proof in a case where the jury was instructed to find a plaintiff guilty of sexual assault by reason of gross negligence?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. LINDBERG, 190 P.3d 664, 45 Cal.4th 1, 82 Cal.Rptr.3d 323 (Cal. 2009):
found not beyond a reasonable doubt, but by a preponderance of the evidence. ( Gibson v. Ortiz, supra, 387 F.3d at p. 822.) The court specifically faulted the trial court for failing to offer an explanation harmonizing the two burdens of proof discussed in the jury instructions. ( Id. at p. 823.) The instructional error was
[82 Cal.Rptr.3d 355]
"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
What is the test for reversing a conviction for sexual assault against a man who was found guilty of sexual assault by reason of gross negligence? (California, United States of America)
In what circumstances will the Court of Appeal overturn a conviction for sexual assault against a man who was found guilty by reason of gross negligence? (California, United States of America)
In what circumstances will the Court overturn a conviction of sexual assault against a man who was found guilty by reason of gross negligence? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for reversal of a jury verdict in a motion where a defendant is found not guilty of assault but convicted of assault by reason of negligence? (California, United States of America)
What is the difference between a reasonable and unreasonable plaintiff and a reasonable plaintiff under a "reasonable implied assumption of risk" approach? (California, United States of America)
How has the jury been instructed on the reasonable doubt standard of proof in a sexual assault case? (California, United States of America)
What is the evidence supporting a finding that a person who was found guilty of sexual assault by reason of abuse has been found guilty by a jury? (California, United States of America)
For the purposes of section 1108.2(1) of the California Criminal Code, is there any constitutional error in a trial court's decision to instruct the jury in a sexual assault case to consider the use of sexual assault evidence admitted under Section 1108? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for determining whether a defendant has been found guilty of assault by reason of gross negligence? (California, United States of America)
Is there any reason to exclude evidence of sexual assault prior to the trial of defendant in his sexual assault case? (California, United States of America)
