Section 2592 | CALCRIM (Jury Instructions)

limited purpose of
<insert other permitted purpose, e.g.,
assessing defendant’s credibility>]. Do not consider such evidence for any
other purpose.]
<Defense: Justifiable Possession>
[If you conclude that the defendant possessed ammunition, that
possession was not unlawful if the defendant can prove that (he/she) was
justified in possessing the ammunition. In order to establish this defense,
the defendant must prove that:
1. (He/She) (found the ammunition/took the ammunition from a
person who was committing a crime against the defendant);
AND
2. (He/She) possessed the ammunition no longer than was necessary
to deliver or transport the ammunition to a law enforcement
agency for that agency to dispose of the ammunition.
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 February 2012
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 prosecution alleges that the defendant was prohibited
from possessing firearms under Penal Code section 29815, possession by someone
prohibited as a condition of probation who was convicted of a crime not listed in
other provisions of Penal Code section 29800, or under Penal Code section 29825,
possession by someone prohibited by a temporary restraining order or other
protective order.
Give element 4 only if the prosecution alleges that the defendant was prohibited
from possessing firearms under Penal Code section 29825.
If the defendant has not stipulated to the probation order, do not give the bracketed
paragraph that begins, “The defendant and the People have stipulated.”
If the defendant does stipulate to the probation order, the court must give the
bracketed paragraph that begins, “The defendant and the People have stipulated.”
The court must also sanitize all references to the probation order to prevent
disclosure of the nature of the conviction to the jury. (People v. Sapp (2003) 31
CALCRIM No. 2592
WEAPONS
478

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 agrees, the court
must not read the portion of the information describing the nature of the conviction.
Likewise, the court must ensure that the verdict forms do not reveal the nature of
the conviction.
On request, the court should give the limiting instruction regarding the evidence of
the probation condition. (People v. Valentine, supra, 42 Cal.3d at p. 182, fn. 7.)
There is no sua sponte duty to give the limiting instruction, and the defense may
prefer that no limiting instruction be given. (People v. Griggs (2003) 110
Cal.App.4th 1137, 1139