Opinion ID: 2630926
Heading Depth: 5
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: Motive (Letner, Tobin)

Text: Defendants raise two familiar challenges to the constitutionality of the trial court's instruction, pursuant to CALJIC No. 2.51, concerning the significance of motive in the jury's determination of defendants' guilt or innocence: that the instruction shifted the burden of proof to defendants to prove their innocence, and failed to explain clearly that motive alone is insufficient to establish guilt. We previously have rejected these claims ( Riggs, supra, 44 Cal.4th at p. 314) and discern no reason to revisit their merits.
As with the previous contention, defendants again raise a claim that we repeatedly have rejectedthat several of the trial court's instructions unconstitutionally diluted the reasonable doubt standard. [32] This claim remains without merit. ( Riggs, supra, 44 Cal.4th at p. 315.)