Jury Instructions
Sunday by: Doreen
The judge gives instructions to the jury after the closing arguments of the attorneys and before jury deliberations. These instructions include reading the law or laws that apply to a particular case. He or she asks them to consider carefully the facts of the case to determine if any laws have been broken.
Jurors are reminded that the prosecuting attorneys carry the burden of proof, meaning that the charge the defendant has been accused of must be proved by them. Both the prosecutor and the defense attorney propose a set of jury instructions, but it is up to the judge to determine which of those instructions apply to the case.
The primary duty of the court is to help the jury understand the law it must apply to the case. If the jury has questions or needs further explanation, they may ask the judge.
“CALJIC’, the California Jury Instructions-Criminal are the most commonly used jury instructions in California. To make them more understandable to the average juror, these instructions have been changed recently. For example, the new jury instruction for murder reads:
“A decision to kill made rashly, impulsively or without careful consideration of the choice and its consequences is not deliberate and premeditated. On the other hand, a cold, calculated decision to kill can be reached quickly.”
As compared to the old jury instruction, which read:
“A cold, calculated judgment and decision may be arrived at in a short period of time, but a mere unconsidered and rash impulse, even though it includes intent to kill, is not deliberation and premeditation as will fix an unlawful killing as murder of the first degree.”
Sometimes CALJIC instructions are not clearly relevant to a given case; they may be too broad in scope. When this happens, the lawyers are allowed to submit customized “pinpoint” jury instructions. Pinpoint instructions clarify the specific legal issues that have direct bearing on the case. However, the court has stipulations regarding pinpoint instructions. It cannot repeat instructions already given; it must relate to the principles of the law; and lastly, it cannot argue specific facts of the case.
