incorrect or incomplete instruction (California) · Go Syfert
← California issues

incorrect or incomplete instruction in California

5 California opinions name it 1 courts 1986–2015 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.

Followed or applied (5)

CaseFollowedCited
People v. Hudsongreen
cal · 2006 · cited in 3 California opinions naming this issue, 2013–2014
2 sentences

2014(See § 1259 [“[t]he appellate court may also review any instruction given . . . even though no objection was made thereto in the lower court, if the substantial rights of the defendant were affected thereby”]; People v. Hudson (2006) 38 Cal.4th 1002, 1011-1012 ; People v. Smithey, supra, 20 Cal.4th at p. 976, fn. 7 ; People v. Denman (2013) 218 Cal.App.4th 800, 812 [“[w]hen the trial court gives an incorrect or incomplete instruction that allegedly affects the substantial rights of a defendant, it is reviewable even if no objection was raised in the trial court”].) We cannot determine whether

2013When the trial court gives an incorrect or incomplete instruction that allegedly affects the substantial rights of a defendant, it is reviewable even if no objection was raised in the trial court. (§ 1259; see People v. Hudson (2006) 38 Cal.4th 1002, 1011-1012 [ 44 Cal.Rptr.3d 632 , 136 P.3d 168 ] [no forfeiture when “trial court gives an instruction that is an incorrect statement of the law”].) However, jury instructions must be considered in light of the entire record to determine whether it is reasonably likely the jury was misled.

23
P. v. Denman CA4/2green
calctapp · 2013 · cited in 2 California opinions naming this issue, 2014–2015
2 sentences

2015(See § 1259 [“[t]he appellate court may also review any instruction given . . . even though no objection was made thereto in the lower court, if the substantial rights of the defendant were affected thereby”]; People v. Myles (2012) 53 Cal.4th 1181, 1219, fn. 12 [forfeiture rule does not apply when “the court gives an instruction that incorrectly states the law”]; People v. Denman (2013) 218 Cal.App.4th 800, 812 [“[w]hen the trial court gives an incorrect or incomplete instruction that allegedly affects the substantial rights of a defendant, it is reviewable even if no objection was raised in

2014(See § 1259 [“[t]he appellate court may also review any instruction given . . . even though no objection was made thereto in the lower court, if the substantial rights of the defendant were affected thereby”]; People v. Hudson (2006) 38 Cal.4th 1002, 1011-1012 ; People v. Smithey, supra, 20 Cal.4th at p. 976, fn. 7 ; People v. Denman (2013) 218 Cal.App.4th 800, 812 [“[w]hen the trial court gives an incorrect or incomplete instruction that allegedly affects the substantial rights of a defendant, it is reviewable even if no objection was raised in the trial court”].) We cannot determine whether

22
People v. Crossgreen
cal · 2008 · cited in 2 California opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013
2 sentences

2013(See People v. Cross (2008) 45 Cal.4th 58, 67-68 [ 82 Cal.Rptr.3d 373 , 190 P.3d 706 ].) Here, the jury verdict form did state that the amount of loss need only be $65,000.

2013(See People v. Cross (2008) 45 Cal.4th 58, 67-68 [ 82 Cal.Rptr.3d 373 , 190 P.3d 706 ].) Here, the jury verdict form did state that the amount of loss need only be $65,000.

12
People v. Livingstongreen
cal · 2012 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015
1 sentence

2015(See § 1259 [“[t]he appellate court may also review any instruction given . . . even though no objection was made thereto in the lower court, if the substantial rights of the defendant were affected thereby”]; People v. Myles (2012) 53 Cal.4th 1181, 1219, fn. 12 [forfeiture rule does not apply when “the court gives an instruction that incorrectly states the law”]; People v. Denman (2013) 218 Cal.App.4th 800, 812 [“[w]hen the trial court gives an incorrect or incomplete instruction that allegedly affects the substantial rights of a defendant, it is reviewable even if no objection was raised in

11
People v. Smitheygreen
cal · 1999 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014
1 sentence

2014(See § 1259 [“[t]he appellate court may also review any instruction given . . . even though no objection was made thereto in the lower court, if the substantial rights of the defendant were affected thereby”]; People v. Hudson (2006) 38 Cal.4th 1002, 1011-1012 ; People v. Smithey, supra, 20 Cal.4th at p. 976, fn. 7 ; People v. Denman (2013) 218 Cal.App.4th 800, 812 [“[w]hen the trial court gives an incorrect or incomplete instruction that allegedly affects the substantial rights of a defendant, it is reviewable even if no objection was raised in the trial court”].) We cannot determine whether

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

CaseCitedYears
People v. Coffman green
cal · 2004
1 sentence

2014(People v. Coffman and Marlow (2004) 34 Cal.4th 1, 120 .) 21 without deciding if the instruction given was erroneous and, if so, whether the error was prejudicial.

12014–2014
Pedesky v. Bleiberg green
calctapp · 1967
1 sentence

1986(Davis v. Johnson, supra, 128 Cal.App.2d 466, 473 ; Pedesky v. Bleiberg, supra, 251 Cal.App.2d 119, 124 .) But it has also been stated that this is true when the jury has been properly instructed as to the law of the case without the requested instruction.

11986–1986
Estate of Jacobs green
calctapp · 1938
1 sentence

1986(Estate of Jacobs, supra, 24 Cal.App.2d 649, 652 ; Estate of Wright, supra, 219 Cal.App.2d 164 ; Estate of Locknane, supra, 208 Cal.App.2d 505, 515 .) The full comment was: “Ladies and gentlemen, you’ll be instruid that if he’s active in procuring her will, hovering around her, and around the execution, and when he says he’s got—he’s around when the will is discussed, and making of the will, as I suggest, he says he’s not, you’ll be instructed that the things that you deem to be active in his procuring a will, that there’s a presumption of undue influence because of his confidential relationsh

11986–1986
Davis v. Johnson green
calctapp · 1954
1 sentence

1986(Davis v. Johnson, supra, 128 Cal.App.2d 466, 473 ; Pedesky v. Bleiberg, supra, 251 Cal.App.2d 119, 124 .) But it has also been stated that this is true when the jury has been properly instructed as to the law of the case without the requested instruction.

11986–1986
Estate of Wright green
calctapp · 1963
1 sentence

1986(Estate of Jacobs, supra, 24 Cal.App.2d 649, 652 ; Estate of Wright, supra, 219 Cal.App.2d 164 ; Estate of Locknane, supra, 208 Cal.App.2d 505, 515 .) The full comment was: “Ladies and gentlemen, you’ll be instruid that if he’s active in procuring her will, hovering around her, and around the execution, and when he says he’s got—he’s around when the will is discussed, and making of the will, as I suggest, he says he’s not, you’ll be instructed that the things that you deem to be active in his procuring a will, that there’s a presumption of undue influence because of his confidential relationsh

11986–1986
Estate of Locknane green
calctapp · 1962
1 sentence

1986(Estate of Jacobs, supra, 24 Cal.App.2d 649, 652 ; Estate of Wright, supra, 219 Cal.App.2d 164 ; Estate of Locknane, supra, 208 Cal.App.2d 505, 515 .) The full comment was: “Ladies and gentlemen, you’ll be instruid that if he’s active in procuring her will, hovering around her, and around the execution, and when he says he’s got—he’s around when the will is discussed, and making of the will, as I suggest, he says he’s not, you’ll be instructed that the things that you deem to be active in his procuring a will, that there’s a presumption of undue influence because of his confidential relationsh

11986–1986

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check