P. v. JOHN
Filed 4/6/06; pub. & mod. order 4/28/06 (see end of opn.)
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JOHN WILLOUGHBY FRASER, Defendant and Appellant. | H028312 (Santa Clara County Super. Ct. No. 190444) |
Continued from Part II……..
Defendant argues that the trial court had a duty to sua sponte modify CALJIC No. 2.20[1] to instruct the jury that it was required to assess the credibility of the victim hearsay statements contained in the police reports. He further contends the trial court's failure to do so compels reversal of the recommitment order because the outcome of the trial depended upon the jurors' assessment of the credibility of the expert witnesses and the reliability of the information on which they relied. However, defendant offers no authority for the proposition that the trial court must specifically instruct the jury in an SVPA trial to assess the credibility of the hearsay victim statements contained in police reports.
The People respond that defendant waived the issue by failing at the time of trial to request either a modification of CALJIC No. 2.20 or a special instruction regarding the credibility of victim hearsay statements. In criminal cases, the general rule is that where a defendant â€
