People v. Johnson

Good Law
119 Cal. App. 4th 976·14 Cal. Rptr. 3d 780·2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 989·2004 Daily Journal DAR 7602·2004 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5597
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 23, 2004F042905California1,979 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gomes, J.

BACKGROUND

A jury found Glen Maurice Johnson guilty of second degree murder, conspiracy to murder, and accessory to murder, found all 13 allegations of overt acts true, and found all three allegations of arming df a principal with a firearm true. (Pen. Code, §§ 32, 182, subd. (a)(1), 187, subd. (a), 12022, subd. (a)(1).) On appeal, he argues, inter alia, that insufficiency of the evidence and instructional error on reasonable doubt require reversal. We will reject the insufficiency of the evidence argument, but instructional error on reasonable doubt will require that we reverse the judgment and order a new trial.

DISCUSSION

1. Sufficiency of the Evidence

2. Instructions on Reasonable Doubt

“The reasonable-doubt standard plays a vital role in the American scheme of criminal procedure. It is a prime instrument for reducing the risk of convictions resting on factual error. The standard provides concrete substance for the presumption of innocence—that bedrock ‘axiomatic and elementary’ principle whose ‘enforcement lies at the foundation of the administration of our criminal law.’ [Citation.]” (In re Winship (1970) 397 U.S. 358, 363 [ 25 L.Ed.2d 368 , 90 S.Ct. 1068 ].)…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.