California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Wesely, 177 Cal.App.3d 397, 223 Cal.Rptr. 9 (Cal. App. 1986):
The circumstances in People v. Crawford, supra, were quite similar. The defendant was convicted of possession of a firearm by an ex-felon. Pursuant to a warrant, officers had arrested the defendant in his bedroom. One handgun was in a holster at the foot of the bed and another handgun was in the bedroom closet. A different defense as to each gun was presented at trial. The appellate court reversed because of the trial court's error in failing to instruct the jury on its own motion that the jurors must unanimously agree as to which one or more of the guns defendant possessed. "Here, an instruction similar to CALJIC No. 17.01 was essential to assure the constitutional guarantee of juror unanimity. Otherwise, certain jurors might have been convinced defendant possessed one weapon, while others were convinced he possessed another weapon without all jurors at a minimum believing he possessed any one weapon." (131 Cal.App.3d at pp. 595-596, 182 Cal.Rptr. 536.)
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.