People v. Sanders CA4/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 27, 2015D066139California483 words

Opinion

Opinion

DISCUSSION

A court has the sua sponte duty to instruct the jury "'"on the general principles of

law relevant to the issues raised by the evidence. . . ." [Citation.] That obligation has

3 been held to include giving instructions on lesser included offenses when the evidence

raises a question as to whether all of the elements of the charged offense were present

[citation], but not when there is no evidence that the offense was less than that charged.'"

(People v. Breverman (1998) 19 Cal.4th 142, 154; see People v. Wickersham (1982)

Cal.3d 307, 323 (Wickersham), disapproved on other grounds in People v. Barton (1995)

12 Cal.4th 186, 200-201.) Absent such evidence, no instruction on a lesser included

offense need be given. (People v. Flannel (1979) 25 Cal.3d 668, 684; Wickersham, at pp.

324-325.)

Section 10851, subdivision (a) prohibits taking or driving a vehicle without its

owner's consent with the intent to permanently or temporarily deprive the owner of the

possession of the vehicle. A "taking" merely requires that "the vehicle be moved for any

distance, no matter how small." (CALCRIM No. 1820.) Thus, a defendant can violate

section 10851 simply…

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.