What is the standard reasonable doubt instruction in voir dire?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Dermesrobian, 2d Crim. No. B250719 (Cal. App. 2014):
The trial court gave the standard reasonable doubt instruction three times. (CALCRIM No. 220.) In voir dire, it correctly stated that proof beyond a reasonable doubt does not require proof beyond all doubt. (CALCRIM No. 220 ["the evidence need not eliminate all possible doubt because everything in life is open to some possible or imaginary doubt"; People v. Pierce (2009) 172 Cal.App.4th 567, 572 [CALCRIM No. 220 correctly states the law].)
"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 a reasonable probability of a more favourable result under the reasonable beyond reasonable doubt standard? (California, United States of America)
What is the difference between the "no reasonable possibility" standard and the "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt" standard? (California, United States of America)
Is the reasonable doubt instruction insufficient to support the definition of reasonable doubt in CALCRIM No. 220? (California, United States of America)
What is the standard of proof for a prosecutor to argue that a reasonable doubt standard is reasonable? (California, United States of America)
Does the absence of lingering doubt from a recitation of evidence the defense offered in an attempt to raise reasonable doubt raise a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
Is the reasonable doubt instruction insufficient to support the definition of reasonable doubt in CALCRIM No. 220? (California, United States of America)
Does the absence of an instruction defining reasonable doubt result in a jury failing to apply the same reasonable doubt test? (California, United States of America)
What are the consequences of the Court's failure to instruct on an instructing on a harmless beyond a reasonable doubt finding? (California, United States of America)
Is there any reasonable doubt that there would have been no reasonable doubt in a jury finding a defendant guilty absent the error? (California, United States of America)
Is Johnsen wrong to instruct the jury on the reasonable doubt standard in the context of third party culpability? (California, United States of America)
