Cal. Codes » Penal Code / PART 2. OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE / TITLE 7. OF PROCEEDINGS AFTER THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE TRIAL AND BEFORE JUDGMENT / CHAPTER 2. The Trial
California Codes

Cal. Penal Code § 1127c (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

In any criminal trial or proceeding where evidence of flight of a defendant is relied upon as tending to show guilt, the court shall instruct the jury substantially as follows:

The flight of a person immediately after the commission of a crime, or after he is accused of a crime that has been committed, is not sufficient in itself to establish his guilt, but is a fact which, if proved, the jury may consider in deciding his guilt or innocence. The weight to which such circumstance is entitled is a matter for the jury to determine.

No further instruction on the subject of flight need be given.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 50 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1948–2025 · leading case: People v. Rangel, 367 P.3d 649 (Cal. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Rangel, 367 P.3d 649 (Cal. 2016). “) Although a trial court is required by statute to instruct on flight when the prosecution relies on evidence of flight by a defendant as tending to show guilt (Pen. Code, § 1127c), there is no similar statutory requirement to instruct when the defense relies on flight by third…”
People v. Pensinger, 805 P.2d 899 (Cal. 1991). · cites it 2× “He argues that there was no evidence of flight, that the flight instruction should not be given when the identity of the perpetrator is in issue and that as a matter of due process California must adopt the rule that before the flight instruction may be given, there must be…”
People v. Manson, 61 Cal. App. 3d 102 (Cal. Ct. App. 1976). · cites it 2× “265 ]; Pen. Code, § 1127c.) Krenwinkel also contends there is no corroborative evidence to connect her with the commission of the La Bianca murders.”
People v. London, 206 Cal. App. 3d 896 (Cal. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 4× “(Pen. Code, § 1127c; use note to CALJIC No.”
People v. Paysinger, 174 Cal. App. 4th 26 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009). “1 Penal Code section 1127c reads as follows: “In any criminal trial or proceeding where evidence of flight of a defendant is relied upon as tending to show guilt, the court shall instruct the jury substantially as follows: “The flight of a person immediately after the commission…”
People v. Najera, 184 P.3d 732 (Cal. 2008). “(Pen. Code, § 1127c.) “The Legislature’s purpose in enacting section 1127c was to abolish the rule stated in many early cases that the jury could not be instructed to consider flight as evidence of guilt unless it had been proved that the *1140 fleeing suspect had previously…”
People v. Prysock, 127 Cal. App. 3d 972 (Cal. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 2× “Penal Code section 1127c provides: "In any criminal trial or proceeding where evidence of flight of a defendant is relied upon as tending to show guilt, the court shall instruct the jury substantially as follows: "The flight of a person immediately after the commission of a…”
People v. Cannady, 503 P.2d 585 (Cal. 1972). · cites it 2× “" [5] Penal Code section 1127c provides: "In any criminal trial .”
People v. Robinson, 392 P.2d 970 (Cal. 1964). · cites it 2× “The question was one for the jury to determine (Pen. Code, § 1127c; People v. Santo (1954) supra, 43 Cal.”
People v. Watson, 75 Cal. App. 3d 384 (Cal. Ct. App. 1977). “Penal Code section 1127c mandates an instruction on flight “where evidence of a defendant’s flight is relied upon as tending to show guilt.”
People v. Green, 609 P.2d 468 (Cal. 1980). “D Penal Code section 1127c provides that when the prosecution relies on evidence of flight by the defendant after a crime is committed as tending to show his consciousness of guilt, the jury shall be instructed that it may consider that evidence in deciding guilt or innocence…”
People v. James, 56 Cal. App. 3d 876 (Cal. Ct. App. 1976). “(Pen. Code, § 1127c; People v. Hill (1967) 67 Cal.”
Show all 50 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.