Lewelling

*278 We began a recent opinion with the observation that "[o]ne of the more disconcerting things that can occur at a criminal trial is the discovery that there is no CALCRIM instruction for the offense charged, thus requiring the judge-hopefully with the assistance of counsel-to formulate appropriate instructions from scratch." ( People v. Starski (2017) 7 Cal.App.5th 215 , 218, 212 Cal.Rptr.3d 622 .) That observation is apt here, as there is no CALCRIM instruction for Penal Code section 149, 1 which criminalizes a "public officer who, under color of authority, without lawful necessity, assaults or beats any person ...." We went on in People v. Starski to hold that the trial court had crafted a jury instruction that properly told the jury the elements of the crime, and we affirmed Starski's conviction. We reach the opposite result here, concluding that the instruction-more accurately, instructions-prepared by the trial court were inaccurate and misleading, allowing the district attorney to present and argue a case on a basis that allowed defendant to be wrongfully convicted. We conclude the error in *279 instructions was prejudicial, and reverse on that ground, without the need to…