What is the test for a claim that a court failed to properly instruct a jury on the applicable principles of law?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. Barnes, C078009 (Cal. App. 2017):

general principles of law relevant to the issues raised by the evidence." [Citation.] Therefore, a claim that a court failed to properly instruct on the applicable principles of law is reviewed de novo. [Citation.] In conducting this review, we first ascertain the relevant law and then "determine the meaning of the instructions in this regard." [Citation.] [] The proper test for judging the adequacy of instructions is to decide whether the trial court "fully and fairly instructed on the applicable law . . . ." [Citation.] " 'In determining whether error has been committed in giving or not giving jury instructions, we must consider the instructions as a whole . . . [and] assume that the jurors are intelligent persons and capable of understanding and correlating all jury instructions which are given. [Citation.]' " [Citation.] "Instructions should be interpreted, if possible, so as to support the judgment rather than defeat it if they are reasonably susceptible to such interpretation." ' " (People v. Mathson (2012) 210 Cal.App.4th 1297, 1311-1312.)

Other Questions


What is the test for a claim that a trial court failed to properly instruct on the applicable principles of law? (California, United States of America)
Is a claim that a court failed to properly instruct on the applicable principles of law reviewed de novo? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for a claim that a trial court failed to properly instruct the jury on the applicable principles of law? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for a de novo claim that the trial court failed to properly instruct the jury on the applicable principles of law? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for a claim that the trial court failed to properly instruct the jury on the applicable principles of law? (California, United States of America)
Does a trial court properly instruct the jury on comparative negligence principles in a nuisance action where a defense claim is made that if the nuisance exists it arose because of negligence? (California, United States of America)
Can a defendant bring a notice of appeal to the Court of Appeal claiming that he failed to raise his constitutional claims in the trial court? (California, United States of America)
How have courts considered a defendant's claim that the court erred in failing to stay a sentence pursuant to section 654 of the Criminal Code? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for a defendant's claim that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury as to the lesser included offense of involuntary manslaughter? (California, United States of America)
How have the Attorney General argued that the Court of Appeal invited error in giving instructions on application of the reasonable doubt principle to a lesser included homicide defendant? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.