Section 2511 | CALCRIM (Jury Instructions)

was not unlawful if the defendant can prove that (he/she) was justified in
possessing the firearm. In order to establish this defense, the defendant
must prove that:
1. (He/She) (found the firearm/took the firearm from a person who
was committing a crime against the defendant);
[AND]
2. (He/She) possessed the firearm no longer than was necessary to
deliver or transport the firearm to a law enforcement agency for
that agency to dispose of the weapon(;/.)
[AND
3. If the defendant was transporting the firearm to a law
enforcement agency, (he/she) gave prior notice to the law
enforcement agency that (he/she) would be delivering a firearm to
the agency for disposal.]]
The defendant has the burden of proving each element of this defense by
a preponderance of the evidence. This is a different standard of proof
than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. To meet the burden of proof by a
preponderance of the evidence, the defendant must prove that it is more
likely than not that each element of the defense is true.
New January 2006; Revised April 2010, February 2012, August 2013
BENCH NOTES
Instructional Duty
The court has a sua sponte duty to give this instruction defining the elements of the
crime. Use this instruction only if the defendant does not stipulate to the prior
conviction. (People v. Sapp (2003) 31 Cal.4th 240, 261 [2 Cal.Rptr.3d 554, 73 P.3d
433]; People v. Valentine (1986) 42 Cal.3d 170, 173 [228 Cal.Rptr. 25, 720 P.2d
913].) If the defendant stipulates, use CALCRIM No. 2511, Possession of Firearm
by Person Prohibited Due to Conviction—Stipulation to Conviction. (People v. Sapp,
supra, 31 Cal.4th at p. 261; People v. Valentine, supra, 42 Cal.3d at p. 173.)
The court has a sua sponte duty to instruct on the union of act and specific intent
or mental state. (People v. Alvarez (1996) 14 Cal.4th 155, 220 [58 Cal.Rptr.2d 385,
926 P.2d 365].) Therefore, because of the knowledge requirement in element 2 of
this instruction, the court must give CALCRIM No. 251, Union of Act and Intent:
Specific Intent or Mental State, together with this instruction. Nevertheless, the
knowledge requirement in element 2 does not require any “specific intent.”
If the prosecution alleges under a single count that the defendant possessed multiple
firearms and the possession was “fragmented as to time . . . [or] space,” the court
has a sua sponte duty to instruct on unanimity. (People v. Wolfe (2003) 114
Cal.App.4th 177, 184–185 [7 Cal.Rptr.3d 483].) Give the bracketed paragraph
WEAPONS
CALCRIM No. 2510
371

The defendant and the People have stipulated, or agreed, that the
defendant was previously convicted of (a/two) (felony/misdemeanor[s]).
This stipulation means that you must accept this fact as proved.
[Do not consider this fact for any other purpose [except for the limited
purpose of
<insert other permitted purpose, e.g., determining
the defendant’s credibility>]. Do not speculate about or discuss the nature
of the conviction.]
[The People allege that the defendant (owned/purchased/re