P. v. Harris CA1/4
Appellant, Domeenic Harris, was convicted of furnishing a firearm to another for the purposes of aiding and abetting the commission of a felony offense and other related crimes. Harris argues the trial court committed structural federal constitutional error when it refused to allow argument from his counsel in closing remarks to the jury about the meaning of beyond a reasonable doubt. He also argues the court’s self-defense instruction, CALCRIM No. 3474, was prejudicially erroneous because it suggested withdrawal alone could negate the right to use force, even if the attacker continued to pose a danger. We reject both arguments and thus affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Harris CA1/4