California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Gutierrez, A153194 (Cal. App. 2019):
When a defendant is charged with a single criminal offense, but the evidence suggests more than one discrete crime, either the prosecutor must elect among the crimes or the court must require the jury to agree on the same criminal act. (People v. Russo (2001) 25 Cal.4th 1124, 1132.) However, "where the evidence shows only a single discrete crime but leaves room for disagreement as to exactly how that crime was committed or what the defendant's precise role was, the jury need not unanimously agree on the basis or, as the cases often put it, the 'theory' whereby the defendant is guilty. [Citation.] The crime of burglary provides a good illustration of the difference between discrete crimes, which require a unanimity instruction, and theories of the case, which do not. Burglary requires an entry with a specified intent. [Citation.] If the evidence showed two different entries with burglarious intent, for example, one of a house on Elm Street on Tuesday and another of a house on Maple Street on Wednesday, the jury would have to unanimously find the defendant guilty of at least one of those acts. If, however, the evidence showed a single entry, but possible uncertainty as to the exact burglarious
Page 9
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.