Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 California opinions name it 2 courts 1958–2020 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Dailgreen2 sentences2017(See, for example, People v. Baker (1954) 42 Cal.2d 550 , 567, 268 P.2d 705 [instruction on insanity and presumption were "confused, contradictory, and ambiguous"]; People v. Dail (1943) 22 Cal.2d 642 , 653, 140 P.2d 828 [contradictory accomplice instructions; "Inconsistent instructions have frequently been held to constitute reversible error where it was impossible to tell which of the conflicting rules was followed by the jury"]; People v. Jeter (2005) 125 Cal.App.4th 1212 , 1217-1218, 23 Cal.Rptr.3d 402 [conflicting instructions on assault with deadly weapons].) The instructions here were a 2017(See, for example, People v. Baker (1954) 42 Cal.2d 550 , 567, 268 P.2d 705 [instruction on insanity and presumption were "confused, contradictory, and ambiguous"]; People v. Dail (1943) 22 Cal.2d 642 , 653, 140 P.2d 828 [contradictory accomplice instructions; "Inconsistent instructions have frequently been held to constitute reversible error where it was impossible to tell which of the conflicting rules was followed by the jury"]; People v. Jeter (2005) 125 Cal.App.4th 1212 , 1217-1218, 23 Cal.Rptr.3d 402 [conflicting instructions on assault with deadly weapons].) The instructions here were a | 1 | 2 |
People v. Bakergreen2 sentences2017(See, for example, People v. Baker (1954) 42 Cal.2d 550 , 567, 268 P.2d 705 [instruction on insanity and presumption were "confused, contradictory, and ambiguous"]; People v. Dail (1943) 22 Cal.2d 642 , 653, 140 P.2d 828 [contradictory accomplice instructions; "Inconsistent instructions have frequently been held to constitute reversible error where it was impossible to tell which of the conflicting rules was followed by the jury"]; People v. Jeter (2005) 125 Cal.App.4th 1212 , 1217-1218, 23 Cal.Rptr.3d 402 [conflicting instructions on assault with deadly weapons].) The instructions here were a 2017(See, for example, People v. Baker (1954) 42 Cal.2d 550 , 567, 268 P.2d 705 [instruction on insanity and presumption were "confused, contradictory, and ambiguous"]; People v. Dail (1943) 22 Cal.2d 642 , 653, 140 P.2d 828 [contradictory accomplice instructions; "Inconsistent instructions have frequently been held to constitute reversible error where it was impossible to tell which of the conflicting rules was followed by the jury"]; People v. Jeter (2005) 125 Cal.App.4th 1212 , 1217-1218, 23 Cal.Rptr.3d 402 [conflicting instructions on assault with deadly weapons].) The instructions here were a | 1 | 2 |
People v. Lewellinggreen1 sentence2020(See People v. Lewelling (2017) 16 Cal.App.5th 276, 299 [“Numerous cases have held that giving instructions that are contradictory or so inconsistent to confuse the jury was reversible error”].) Alternatively, defendant argues that by failing to request this language be clarified, his counsel rendered ineffective assistance. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Jacksongreen2 sentences1971While it is true that a defendant in a criminal action is entitled to an instruction on his theory of the case as disclosed by the evidence (see People v. Jackson, 233 Cal.App.2d 639, 640 [ 43 Cal.Rptr. 817 ]), such instruction, contrary to defendant’s position, must be an accurate statement of sound legal principles before it must be given. 1971While it is true that a defendant in a criminal action is entitled to an instruction on his theory of the case as disclosed by the evidence (see People v. Jackson, 233 Cal.App.2d 639, 640 [ 43 Cal.Rptr. 817 ]), such instruction, contrary to defendant’s position, must be an accurate statement of sound legal principles before it must be given. | 1 | 1 |
Gray v. Brinkerhoffgreen2 sentences1958Cited and relied upon in this connection, are Pierce v. Black, 131 Cal.App.2d 521, 524 [ 280 P.2d 913 ] ; Gray v. Brinkerhoff, 41 Cal.2d 180, 183 [ 258 P.2d 834 ]; and LeBlanc v. Browne, 78 Cal.App.2d 63, 75 [ 177 P.2d 347 ]. 1958Cited and relied upon in this connection, are Pierce v. Black, 131 Cal.App.2d 521, 524 [ 280 P.2d 913 ] ; Gray v. Brinkerhoff, 41 Cal.2d 180, 183 [ 258 P.2d 834 ]; and LeBlanc v. Browne, 78 Cal.App.2d 63, 75 [ 177 P.2d 347 ]. | 1 | 1 |
LeBlanc v. Brownegreen2 sentences1958Cited and relied upon in this connection, are Pierce v. Black, 131 Cal.App.2d 521, 524 [ 280 P.2d 913 ] ; Gray v. Brinkerhoff, 41 Cal.2d 180, 183 [ 258 P.2d 834 ]; and LeBlanc v. Browne, 78 Cal.App.2d 63, 75 [ 177 P.2d 347 ]. 1958Cited and relied upon in this connection, are Pierce v. Black, 131 Cal.App.2d 521, 524 [ 280 P.2d 913 ] ; Gray v. Brinkerhoff, 41 Cal.2d 180, 183 [ 258 P.2d 834 ]; and LeBlanc v. Browne, 78 Cal.App.2d 63, 75 [ 177 P.2d 347 ]. | 1 | 1 |
Pierce v. Blackgreen2 sentences1958Cited and relied upon in this connection, are Pierce v. Black, 131 Cal.App.2d 521, 524 [ 280 P.2d 913 ] ; Gray v. Brinkerhoff, 41 Cal.2d 180, 183 [ 258 P.2d 834 ]; and LeBlanc v. Browne, 78 Cal.App.2d 63, 75 [ 177 P.2d 347 ]. 1958Cited and relied upon in this connection, are Pierce v. Black, 131 Cal.App.2d 521, 524 [ 280 P.2d 913 ] ; Gray v. Brinkerhoff, 41 Cal.2d 180, 183 [ 258 P.2d 834 ]; and LeBlanc v. Browne, 78 Cal.App.2d 63, 75 [ 177 P.2d 347 ]. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Jeter
green
2 sentences2017(See, for example, People v. Baker (1954) 42 Cal.2d 550 , 567, 268 P.2d 705 [instruction on insanity and presumption were "confused, contradictory, and ambiguous"]; People v. Dail (1943) 22 Cal.2d 642 , 653, 140 P.2d 828 [contradictory accomplice instructions; "Inconsistent instructions have frequently been held to constitute reversible error where it was impossible to tell which of the conflicting rules was followed by the jury"]; People v. Jeter (2005) 125 Cal.App.4th 1212 , 1217-1218, 23 Cal.Rptr.3d 402 [conflicting instructions on assault with deadly weapons].) The instructions here were a 2017(See, for example, People v. Baker (1954) 42 Cal.2d 550 , 567, 268 P.2d 705 [instruction on insanity and presumption were "confused, contradictory, and ambiguous"]; People v. Dail (1943) 22 Cal.2d 642 , 653, 140 P.2d 828 [contradictory accomplice instructions; "Inconsistent instructions have frequently been held to constitute reversible error where it was impossible to tell which of the conflicting rules was followed by the jury"]; People v. Jeter (2005) 125 Cal.App.4th 1212 , 1217-1218, 23 Cal.Rptr.3d 402 [conflicting instructions on assault with deadly weapons].) The instructions here were a | 2 | 2017–2017 |
Hinman v. Westinghouse Electric Co.
green
1 sentence1986Co., supra, 2 Cal.3d at p. 963 .) Negligence as a Matter of Law (8) For purposes of retrial, we briefly address the second contention of Perez that the trial court erred by refusing to instruct the jury that Garcia was negligent as a matter of law. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.