Title: P. v. Butler
Citation: 46 Cal. 4th 847, modification : 47 Cal. 4th 317a
Docket Number: S055501, S055501m
State: California
Issuer: California Supreme Court
Date: August 12, 2009

Filed 8/12/09 
 
 
 
 
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 
THE PEOPLE, 
) 
 
 
)  
S055501 
 
Plaintiff and Respondent, 
) 
 
 
)  
Los Angeles County 
 
v. 
)  
Super. Ct. No. NA019605 
 
 
) 
 
RAYMOND OSCAR BUTLER, 
) 
 
)  
 
 
Defendant and Appellant. 
)  
 
 ___________________________________ ) 
  
 
MODIFICATION OF OPINION 
THE COURT: 
 
The opinion herein, filed on June 18, 2009, appearing at 46 Cal.4th 847, is 
modified as follows: 
Footnote 18 on page 882 is modified to read:   
Defense counsel objected only to the last sentence of the court’s initial instruction, 
despite the court’s invitation to place further objections on the record.  On appeal, Butler 
makes no argument concerning the effect of the last sentence of that instruction standing 
alone.  Rather, his arguments depend as well on portions of the instruction to which no 
objection was made.  Accordingly, we consider his appellate claims only to determine 
whether the instructions affected his substantial rights.  (§ 1259.)  Apart from 
considerations of waiver, we note that defense counsel’s failure to object tends to 
indicate[] that the potential for coercion argued now was not apparent to one on the spot.  
(Lowenfield v. Phelps (1988) 484 U.S. 231, 240.)   
 
This modification does not affect the judgment.