Opinion ID: 1227864
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: Descriptive Titles on Written Instructions.

Text: (18) Defendant submits no authority for his proposition that the court erred in failing to delete the descriptive title and the source of the written instructions that were sent to the jury room. Moreover, trial counsel did not request that the titles be deleted, nor did he object to the written instructions going to the jury. In People v. Welborn (1966) 242 Cal. App.2d 668 [51 Cal. Rptr. 644], it was argued that the court erred in permitting the instructions to be taken into the jury room. The appellate court held: Penal Code section 1137 states that instructions may be taken into the jury room. Contending that it was error for the judge to permit this in the case at bench because some of the instructions contained deletions and additions by the judge, and because certain of the instructions indicated which side had offered them (or the fact that some were `Court' instructions), defendant cites People v. Lyons [(1956)] 47 Cal.2d 311, 322-323. The case has no application. The instruction there condemned was a formula instruction added by the judge indicating his belief in the guilt of the accused. There was nothing of that nature here.... (242 Cal. App.2d at p. 677.) As the Attorney General notes, descriptive titles undoubtedly aided the jurors to find the particular subjects they wished to consult. We find no error.