Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal News Blogs -> Legal Blog Watch

Legal News

: Legal Blog Watch

Defining 'Reasonable Doubt'? Appellate Court Tells Trial Courts to 'Let It Be'

By Bruce Carton

At the California Appellate Report blog, Shaun Martin points to the recent case of People v. Moore as the latest example of why the appellate courts really, really wish the trial courts would not try to explain the concept of "beyond a reasonable doubt" to jurors. Over and over, California appellate opinions through the years reiterate that the term "best defines itself'"; that "all attempts at definition are likely to prove confusing and dangerous"; and that "every attempt to explain [the definition of reasonable doubt] renders an explanation of the explanation necessary.? In short, as summed up by the court in People v. Johnson, 119 Cal. App.4th 976, 986 (2004), "[w]e trust that any trial judge who reads that history will heed the two English bards: . . . 'Let it be.' (Lennon & McCartney, Northern Songs 1970, 'Let It Be.')? But the trial court in Moore did not let it be. The judge tried to explain reasonable doubt through a series of examples, including: whether one can know that an unfurled flag is, in fact, an American flag; whether one can tell what a jigsaw puzzle will show despite some missing pieces; and whether one can know whether the...

Full post as published by Legal Blog Watch on March 21, 2011 (boomark / email).