Opinion ID: 4541411
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: standard of review

Text: ¶12 We review jury instructions de novo to determine whether they accurately inform the jury of the governing law. People v. DeGreat, 2018 CO 83, ¶ 15, 428 P.3d 541, 544. Similarly, whether jury instructions constitute a constructive amendment that subjects a defendant to the risk of conviction for an uncharged offense is a question of law that we review de novo. See id. 8 ¶13 When a defendant fails to object to a trial court’s jury instructions, the instructions are reviewed for plain error. People v. Garcia, 28 P.3d 340, 344 (Colo. 2001). For an error to be deemed plain, it must be both obvious and substantial. People v. Miller, 113 P.3d 743, 750 (Colo. 2005). This means the error must “so undermine the fundamental fairness of the trial itself as to cast serious doubt on the reliability of the judgment of conviction.” People v. Weinreich, 119 P.3d 1073, 1078 (Colo. 2005).5 In the jury instruction context, “the defendant must ‘demonstrate not only that the instruction affected a substantial right, but also that the record reveals a reasonable possibility that the error contributed to his conviction.’” Miller, 113 P.3d at 750 (quoting Garcia, 28 P.3d at 344).