California v. Stockman
Annotate this CaseThe issue this appeal presented for the Court of Appeal's review related to the model jury instructions for driving under the influence (DUI) causing injury (Veh. Code, sec. 23153 (a)), and its lesser included offense of DUI (sec. 23152 (a)). Defendant-appellant Christopher Stockman contended the model instructions differed in a manner that affected his jury verdict. The instruction on the lesser offense of DUI, CALCRIM No. 2110, directed the jury that the “manner in which a person drives is not enough by itself to establish” that the person was “under the influence,” though it may be considered along with other factors. The instruction for DUI causing injury, CALCRIM No. 2100, contained no such direction. Stockman unsuccessfully sought a modified version of CALCRIM No. 2100 that would harmonize the two instructions. The Court of Appeal agreed with Stockman that there was no basis to provide differing instructions for determining whether a person was “under the influence” as to these two offenses. The Court published its opinion to encourage trial courts not to provide differing instructions for the two offenses, and it likewise encouraged the Judicial Council of California to consider reconciling the two instructions by amending either CALCRIM No. 2100 or CALCRIM No. 2110 to eliminate this disparity. To this case, however, the Court concluded that the “manner of driving” instruction implicated principles of law that had no bearing on this case. Thus, any error was harmless. Judgment was affirmed.
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.