California Codes
Cal. Penal Code § 1404 (2026)
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov
JustiaCode on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Neither a departure from the form or mode prescribed by this Code in respect to any pleading or proceeding, nor an error or mistake therein, renders it invalid, unless it has actually prejudiced the defendant, or tended to his prejudice, in respect to a substantial right.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1880–2026 · leading case: People v. Cahill, 853 P.2d 1037 (Cal. 1993).
People v. Cahill, 853 P.2d 1037 (Cal. 1993). “" So too, Statutes 1851, chapter 29, section 601, page 279: "Neither a departure from the form or mode prescribed by this Act in respect to any pleadings or proceedings, nor an error or mistake therein shall render the same invalid, unless it have actually prejudiced the…”
People v. Superior Court (Zamudio), 999 P.2d 686 (Cal. 2000). “Article VI, section 13 Article VI, section 13 provides, in its entirety: "No judgment shall be set aside, or new trial granted, in any cause, on the ground of misdirection of the jury, or of the improper admission or rejection of evidence, or for any error as to any matter of…”
People v. Chessman, 19 A.L.R. 2d 1084 (Cal. 1950). “” (Pen. Code, § 1404.) “No indictment ... is insufficient, nor can the trial, judgment, .”
People v. Domagalski, 214 Cal. App. 3d 1380 (Cal. Ct. App. 1989). “Code, § 960; Pen. Code, § 1404; Renk v. Municipal Court (1963) 213 Cal.”
People v. Becker, 181 P.2d 958 (Cal. Ct. App. 1947). “(Pen. Code, § 1404.) A judgment is not fatally defective when the information, proceedings of trial, judgment of conviction and commitment, taken together, sufficiently show the crime of which a defendant has been convicted and sentenced so as to protect him against a subsequent…”
People v. Bugg, 179 P.2d 346 (Cal. Ct. App. 1947). “There is no intimation in the record that defendant desired to exercise an additional peremptory challenge or would have done so if the mistake of law had not been made.”
People v. Smith, 249 Cal. App. 2d 395 (Cal. Ct. App. 1967). “1103 this distinction is obsolete: The defendant may offer specific acts of the victim and the prosecution may rebut with similar evidence.”
People v. McKinney, 161 P.2d 957 (Cal. Ct. App. 1945). “) Penal Code, section 1404 provides that “Neither a departure from the form or mode prescribed by this code in respect to any pleading or proceeding, nor an error or mistake therein, renders it invalid, unless it has actually prejudiced the defendant, or tended to his prejudice,…”
People v. Huss, 241 Cal. App. 2d 361 (Cal. Ct. App. 1966). “2d 116 ]; Pen. Code, § 1404.) There being no prejudice, the judgment of conviction on Count I should be affirmed.”
People v. Smith, 311 P.2d 149 (Cal. Ct. App. 1957). “” (Pen. Code, § 1404.) The mistake of the trial court in erroneously stating the degree of the offense at the time of judgment and sentence neither prejudiced nor tended to prejudice the defendant as the record is clear that he was convicted of burglary in the first degree.”
People v. Toney, 192 Cal. App. 2d 711 (Cal. Ct. App. 1961). “(Pen. Code, § 1404.) The court, on appeal, may affirm or modify a judgment appealed from.”
People v. Cummings, 57 Cal. 88 (Cal. 1880). “(Pen. Code, § 1404.) If any instructions unfavorable to the defendant, which had been asked by the people and refused by the Court, had been taken out by the jury against the defendant’s objection, we think that it might have tended to the prejudice of the defendant in respect…”
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.