People v. Garcia
Annotate this CaseFormer CALJIC No. 2.50.02, a jury instruction on the use of charged acts of domestic violence to prove a disposition to commit domestic violence, does not lower the prosecution's burden of proof. In this case, the Court of Appeal held that the jury was properly permitted to consider the charges of burglary and dissuading a witness when deciding whether to draw a discretionary inference that defendant had a disposition to commit domestic violence, because both of the charges qualify as domestic violence offenses as defined under Evidence Code section 1109; former CALJIC No. 2.50.02 correctly stated the applicable standard for a juror's consideration of charged offenses for this purpose as a preponderance of the evidence; the instruction also clearly differentiated between the preponderance of the evidence standard of proof for drawing a discretionary inference of propensity and the beyond a reasonable doubt standard that must be met before a defendant may be convicted; the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of past domestic violence incidents and phone sex recordings; defendant was not prejudiced by the cumulative effect of alleged errors; and the trial court did not err in instructing the jury that it must unanimously agree on the events that formed the basis of the witness intimidation charge.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.