What is the test for instructing a jury in a criminal trial that the trial court can not "figuratively throw up its hands and tell the jury it can't help"?

Applying this test, we find no error. The trial court here did not "figuratively throw up its hands and tell the jury it [could not] help" (People v. Beardslee, supra, 53 Cal.3d at p. 97); rather, it considered how best to aid jurors while maintaining neutrality as between the parties. "'The influence of the trial judge on the jury is necessarily and

Page 18

properly of great weight,' [citation], and jurors are ever watchful of the words that fall from him [or her]. Particularly in a criminal trial, the judge's last word is apt to be the decisive word." (Bollenbach v. United States (1946) 326 U.S. 607, 612.) "'"An instruction should contain a principle of law applicable to the case, expressed in plain language, indicating no opinion of the court as to any fact in issue."' [Citation.]" (People v. Assad (2010) 189 Cal.App.4th 187, 198; see 1127 ["The court shall inform the jury ... that the jurors are the exclusive judges of all questions of fact submitted to them .... Either party may present to the court any written charge on the law, but not with respect to matters of fact ...."].)