legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Anderson CA1/1
Defendant sexually assaulted 14-year-old N.G. During the trial, the court admitted evidence of prior acts of sexual abuse pursuant to Evidence Code section 1108. Defendant contends the trial court violated his due process rights by instructing the jury under CALCRIM former No. 1191 (hereafter CALCRIM No. 1191) that it could use the uncharged prior sex crimes, if proved by a preponderance of the evidence, to show criminal propensity in establishing guilt of the charged sex crime. Rather, he argues the uncharged sex crimes must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt because they are a link in the direct chain of proof of defendant’s guilt. Having considered defendant’s contention, we affirm because the instruction did not dilute the prosecution’s burden of proof with respect to the charged sex crime.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale