California Court of Appeal

Conviction after court failed to instruct jury with CALJIC No. 2.90, defining reasonable doubt as the absence of "an abiding conviction of the truth of the charge" and admonishing the jury the defendant is presumed innocent until the contrary is proved, was not federal constitutional error when the instructions given adequately apprised the jury of both the reasonable doubt standard and the due process requirement that guilt be adjudged solely on the evidence presented.

Appellate Information

• Decided 06/14/2006
• Published 06/14/2006

Judges

• PERLUSS, P.J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Sharon Fleming, under appointment by the California Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant., Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Kyle S. Brodie and David E. Madeo, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.