California Jury Instructions
Volume 1-General Instructions
Series 100
CALCRIM 103
Reasonable Doubt

PRETRIAL                                                                     CALCIUM No. 103

a preponderance of the evidence, give the bracketed phrase "unless I specifically tell you otherwise."

AUTHORITY

• Instructional Requirements. Pen. Code, §§ 1096, 1096a; People v. Freeman (1994) 8 Ca1.4th 450, 503-504 [34 Cal.Rptr.2d 558, 882 P.2d 249]; Victor v. Nebraska (1994) 511 U.S. 1, 16-17 [114 S.Ct. 1239, 127 L.Ed.2d 583]; Lisenbee v. Henry (9th Cir. 1999) 166 F.3d 997.

Secondary Sources

5 Witkin & Epstein, California Criminal Law (3d ed. 2000) Criminal Trial, §§ 521, 637, 640.

4 Millman, Sevilla & Tarlow, California Criminal Defense Practice, Ch. 83, Evidence, § 83.03[1], Ch. 85, Submission to Jury and Verdict, §§ 85.02[2][a][i], 85.04[2][a] (Matthew Bender).

COMMENTARY

This instruction is based directly on Penal Code section 1096. The primary changes are a reordering of concepts and a definition of reasonable doubt stated in the affirmative rather than in the negative. The instruction also refers to the jury's duty to impartially compare and consider all the evidence. (See Victor v. Nebraska (1994) 511 U.S. 1, 16-17 [114 S.Ct. 1239, 127 L.Ed.2d 583].) The appellate courts have urged the trial courts to exercise caution in modifying the language of section 1096 to avoid error in defining reasonable doubt. (See People v. Freeman (1994) 8 Ca1.4th 450, 503-504 [34 Cal.Rptr.2d 558, 882 P.2d 249]; People v. Garcia (1975) 54 Cal.App.3d 61 [126 Cal.Rptr. 275].) The instruction includes all the concepts contained in section 1096 and substantially tracks the statutory language.

11        (Pub. 1284)

Copyright 2008 Judicial Council of California. Published by LexisNexis Matthew Bender, official publisher of the Judicial Council Jury Instructions.

11.

 

Reasonable Doubt Page 10
 

Copyright 2007 Judicial Council of California. Published by LexisNexis Matthew Bender,