Is there compelling legal argument to support the argument that the definition of reasonable doubt is unconstitutional?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from The People v. Nunez, G039753, No. 06CF2684 (Cal. App. 2011):
1509; People v. Rios (2007) 151 Cal.App.4th 1154, 1156-1157.) Other than his general disagreement with the reasoning of these cases, Nunez offers no compelling justification for concluding CALCRIM No. 220 is unconstitutional. We find the reasoning in these cases sound and conclude CALCRIM No. 220 properly defines reasonable doubt.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
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.
Other Questions
Is the reasonable doubt instruction insufficient to support the definition of reasonable doubt in CALCRIM No. 220? (California, United States of America)
Is the reasonable doubt instruction insufficient to support the definition of reasonable doubt in CALCRIM No. 220? (California, United States of America)
Does the definition of reasonable doubt in Cal.C.CRCRIM No. 220, 220, give rise to a claim that it does not properly define reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
Does the absence of lingering doubt from a recitation of evidence the defense offered in an attempt to raise reasonable doubt raise a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
Does the Defendant have any cogent legal argument supporting a finding of error as to the trial court's denial of a motion to compel discovery? (California, United States of America)
Does the absence of an instruction defining reasonable doubt result in a jury failing to apply the same reasonable doubt test? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for misconduct in a criminal case where a prosecutor argued that reasonable doubt was not a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
Is there any reasonable doubt that there would have been no reasonable doubt in a jury finding a defendant guilty absent the error? (California, United States of America)
What is the evidence that supports the argument that the evidence supports the proposition that there is no evidence supporting the claim? (California, United States of America)
Does the doctrine of reasonable doubt apply to a defendant's due process right to appeal against a jury verdict that diminished the prosecution's burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
