P. v. Taylor-Ameneyro
In this case the trial court instructed the jury that the testimony of a single witness can prove any fact -- except for that of defendant Amy Dianne Taylor-Ameneyro, which required supporting evidence. The court did not explain why the jury should treat defendant’s testimony differently from that of any other witness. Defendant contends this instruction was reversible error. We agree that it was error, but find it harmless under the standard of ADDIN BA xc <@cs> xl 57 s EAOIYO000001 xhfl Rep l "Chapman v. California (1967)386 U.S. 18 [17 L.Ed.2d 705]" Chapman v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 18 [17 L.Ed.2d 705] ( ADDIN BA xc <@$cs> xl 7 s EAOIYO000001 xpl 1 Chapman). Therefore we shall affirm, although we must remand the matter for correction of the abstract of judgment.

Comments on P. v. Taylor-Ameneyro

Post Reply

Search thread for Go ►

Download thread as textHTMLGo ►

• 0/5
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5

Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment: Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

Submit Advanced