People v. Jaramillo CA3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 18, 2022C094172California4,057 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND

This factual recitation is limited in light of the narrow issues raised on appeal.

The abstract of judgment failed to identify the length of the terms imposed and stayed, which we will direct the trial court to correct.

2 A. The jury instructions After closing arguments that did not significantly address the meaning of the reasonable doubt standard, the trial court distributed copies of the jury instructions. It explained the jury could take notes on them but should disregard any deleted sections and “[o]nly consider the final version of the instructions in your deliberation.” The court then directed the jury to follow the law as explained by the court, follow the instructions of the court, and consider all the instructions together. As to the presumption of innocence and the requirement that the People prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt, the court stated: “The fact that a criminal charge has been filed against the defendant is not evidence that the charge is the true [sic]. You must not be biased against the defendant just because he has been arrested, charged with a crime or brought to trial. A defendant in a criminal case is presumed to be…

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.