California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Aledamat, 251 Cal.Rptr.3d 371, 447 P.3d 277, 8 Cal.5th 1 (Cal. 2019):
Applying a different standard of error in this case would be particularly anomalous. If the trial court had simply instructed the jury that a box cutter was a deadly weapon as a matter of law, and given no correct instruction whatsoever, the error would clearly be subject to Chapman harmless error review. ( People v. Brooks (2017) 3 Cal.5th 1, 69, 219 Cal.Rptr.3d 331, 396 P.3d 480 [misdescription of an element of a charged offense].) But here, the court also provided the jury with a valid theory. Providing the jury with
[8 Cal.5th 12]
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.