Legal Opinion · Dissent

People v. Miranda

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 20, 1967No. Crim. 12336Published

1Dissent

*527ROTH, P. J.

I dissent.

The question is not one of double punishment.

In my opinion, the crucial error at bench is the failure of the trial court to instruct the jury that it could bring in only one verdict of guilty.

Respondent concedes the trial court properly should have instructed the jury that only one verdict could be returned if they found appellant guilty, but argues that appellant was not prejudiced by the court’s failure so to instruct. I think that on the facts of this case failure to instruct the jury that it could bring in but one verdict, was prejudicial error. (People v. Ross, 67…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. People v. WatsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  2. People v. GreerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
  3. People v. ConleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
  4. People v. MarshallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
  5. People v. RossCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API