Section 2965 | CALCRIM (Jury Instructions)

under 18 years old> caused a traffic collision while driving the
vehicle.
An alcoholic beverage is a liquid or solid material intended to be
consumed that contains one-half of 1 percent or more of alcohol by
volume. [An alcoholic beverage includes
<insert type[s] of
beverage[s] from Bus. & Prof. Code, § 23004, e.g., wine, beer>.]
An act causes a traffic collision if the collision is the direct, natural, and
probable consequence of the act and the collision would not have
happened without the act. A natural and probable consequence is one
that a reasonable person would know is likely to happen if nothing
unusual intervenes. In deciding whether a consequence is natural and
probable, consider all the circumstances established by the evidence.
<Defense: Good Faith Belief at Least 18>
[The defendant is not guilty of this crime if (he/she) reasonably and
actually believed that
<insert name of person under 18> was
at least 18 years old. The People have the burden of proving beyond a
reasonable doubt that the defendant did not reasonably and actually
believe that
<insert name of person under 18> was at least
18 years old. If the People have not met this burden, you must find the
defendant not guilty of this crime.]
[There may be more than one cause of a traffic collision. An act causes a
collision only if it is a substantial factor in causing the collision. A
substantial factor is more than a trivial or remote factor. However, it does
not need to be the only factor that causes the collision.]
[Under the law, a person becomes one year older as soon as the first
minute of his or her birthday has begun.]
[In evaluating the test results in this case, you may consider whether or
not the person administering the test or the agency maintaining the
testing device followed the regulations of the California Department of
Health Services.]
New January 2006
BENCH NOTES
Instructional Duty
The court has a sua sponte duty to give this instruction defining the elements of the
crime.
The court has a sua sponte duty to instruct on proximate cause. (People v.
Bernhardt (1963) 222 Cal.App.2d 567, 590–591 [35 Cal.Rptr. 401].) If there is
evidence of multiple causes of the collision, the court should also give bracketed
VANDALISM, LOITERING, AND TRESPASS
CALCRIM No. 2965
765

6 Millman, Sevilla & Tarlow, California Criminal Defense Practice, Ch. 140,
Challenges to Crimes, § 140.04 (Matthew Bender).
VANDALISM, LOITERING, AND TRESPASS
CALCRIM No. 2965
767