When will a jury be instructed to acquit defendant if the prosecution fails to establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from The People v. Robert Eugene Wash., F056938, No. RF005212A (Cal. App. 2010):
"In the present case, as noted above, the jury was instructed to acquit defendant if the prosecution failed to establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. It would have been redundant to have required an additional instruction which directed the jury to acquit if a reasonable doubt existed regarding defendant's presence during the crime. As stated in [People v. Whitson (1944) 25 Cal.2d 593 at page 604], no juror could possibly be misled by the failure to instruct on the significance of defendant's alibi defense." (Id. at p. 438.)
"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
Does Defendant have a claim that the prosecution reduced the burden of proving a defendant's guilt by failing to instruct the jury that refusal was insufficient to establish guilt? (California, United States of America)
How has the jury been instructed on the prosecution's burden of proving a defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
Does the doctrine of reasonable doubt apply to a defendant's due process right to appeal against a jury verdict that diminished the prosecution's burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
Does an instruction allowing the jury to credit or reject an inference "based on its evaluation of the evidence" relieve the People's burden of establishing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for establishing a defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
Does the permissive language in Section 667.61 of the Penal Code undermine the other instructions requiring the prosecution to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt? (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)
In what circumstances will a jury interpret the instructions of a jury as permitting a conviction on a standard less than beyond beyond beyond the reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
Is a defendant's right to a jury verdict of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt denied when there is an instructional omission of an element of the crime? (California, United States of America)
If defendant fails to establish all the errors of the trial court as a cumulative result of the cumulative error, can he continue to argue that the cumulative effect of the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt and mandates reversal? (California, United States of America)
