Opinion ID: 1405957
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Whether We Should Adopt the Law of Other Jurisdictions

Text: Other states have adopted varying rules governing the issue of whether jury deliberations should be guided into a particular sequence. As noted above, some states have adopted a strict acquittal-first rule under which the jury must acquit of the greater offense before even considering lesser included offenses. (See ante fn. 7.) Other states simply require that a jury first consider the greater offense, and if unable to agree on the greater, then proceed to consider the lesser included offense. Thus rather than adopting an acquittal-first rule, they authorize a disagreement instruction guiding the jury's deliberations. [10] As noted above, our rule does not require the jury to deliberate in any particular sequence, and hence we need not deal with difficult questions as to whether a strict structuring of the sequence of deliberations may in and of itself significantly affect outcome. [11] Several federal jurisdictions, given jury instructions which seem to suggest one must acquit of the greater offense before determining defendant's guilt of a lesser included, have also had occasion to consider the issue. ( See United States v. Tsanas (2d Cir.1978) 572 F.2d 340, 344, cert. den. 435 U.S. 995 [56 L.Ed.2d 84, 98 S.Ct. 1647]; see also 1 Devitt & Blackmar, Federal Jury Practice and Instructions: Civil and Criminal (3d ed. 1977) § 18.05, p. 582.) The majority that have considered the meaning of such language seem to have concluded that, given the tactical advantages of various instructions, either a strict acquittal-first instruction or a disagreement instruction may be given at defendant's option. [12] We need not engage in this national debate, as our rule derived from Stone, supra, 31 Cal.3d 503, seems adequate to protect both the defendant's interest in not improperly restricting the jury's deliberations and the People's interest in requiring the jury to grapple with the prospect of defendant's guilt of the greatest offense charged.