California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Nelson, 1 Cal.5th 513, 205 Cal.Rptr.3d 746, 376 P.3d 1178 (Cal. 2016):
People v. Swain (1996) 12 Cal.4th 593, 601, 49 Cal.Rptr.2d 390, 909 P.2d 994 [proof of an unlawful intent to kill is the functional equivalent of express malice].) He argues further the instructional error was compounded by weak evidence of deliberation.
When we review challenges to a jury instruction as being incorrect or incomplete, we evaluate the instructions as a whole, not in isolation. [Citation.] For ambiguous instructions, the test is whether there is a reasonable likelihood that the jury misunderstood and misapplied the instruction. (People v. Rundle (2008) 43 Cal.4th 76, 149, 74 Cal.Rptr.3d 454, 180 P.3d 224.)
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.