Opinion ID: 844172
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The instructions given to the jury

Text: The prosecution theorized that defendant broke into Connie‘s home with the intent to assault her, thereby committing a burglary, but their interaction escalated into a double homicide. In response, the trial court proposed modified versions of CALJIC No. 8.81.17, which specifically identified the special- 105 circumstance-eligible felony as burglary — and CALJIC No. 14.50, which defined burglary. The trial court, however, instructed the jury pursuant to an erroneous modified version of CALJIC No. 8.81.17 that did not mention burglary. Instead, the modified instruction repeatedly identified the special-circumstance-eligible felony as ―a theft or other felony, to wit, assault with intent to commit great bodily 38 injury or with a deadly weapon, a handgun.‖ In defining burglary, the court instructed the jury that at the time of entry defendant must have had ―the specific intent to commit the crime of a theft or other felony to wit, assault with intent to commit great bodily injury or with a deadly weapon, a handgun.‖ The court gave the jury identical instructions in written form.