California v. Stutelberg
Annotate this CaseAfter a heated exchange outside a bar, defendant Nathaniel Stutelberg jabbed a box cutter at Michelle S. and Chris L., lacerating Michelle's head but not injuring Chris. Among other things, the jury convicted Stutelberg of mayhem with a deadly weapon enhancement as to Michelle, and assault with a deadly weapon as to Chris. The single issue presented to the Court of Appeal in this matter was whether the trial court erred in instructing the jury on the definition of "deadly weapon" such that either of Stutelberg's convictions should have been reversed. As to the offense against Michelle, the Court concluded the instructional error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt: “We have no difficulty deciding from the record that the jury would have reached the same verdict but for the error.” The Court reached a different conclusion regarding Chris: Stutelberg's use of the box cutter in that encounter “is more nebulous, and on the record before us we cannot conclude that the instructional error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.” Accordingly, the Court reversed Stutelberg’s conviction for assault with a deadly weapon in count 3 but otherwise affirmed the judgment.
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.