California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Castillo, 16 Cal.4th 1009, 68 Cal.Rptr.2d 648, 945 P.2d 1197 (Cal. 1997):
[16 Cal.4th 1021] In these circumstances, clarification was critical. Moreover, the instructions do nothing to " 'pinpoint' the crux" of defendant's only viable defense to first degree murder. In closing argument, counsel not only argued defendant did not premeditate or deliberate due to PCP intoxication, he specifically directed the jury to consider the instructions on this point. It is difficult to conceive a strategic explanation for not having the trial court include a clarification as well as add its imprimatur to the argument. (See People v. Whitehurst (1992) 9 Cal.App.4th 1045, 1051, fn. 2, 12 Cal.Rptr.2d 33.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.