Section 315 | CALCRIM (Jury Instructions)

• [How certain was the witness when he or she made an
identification?]
[A witness’s expression of certainty about an identification, whether the
identification was made before or at the trial, may not be a reliable
indicator of accuracy. Among the factors you may consider when
evaluating the significance of the witness’s certainty in the identification
are the following:
[• How soon after the event did the witness express certainty about
the identification?]
[• If the witness made an identification before trial, did the witness
express certainty at the time of that identification?]
[• Before the identification, did the witness express confidence in
being able to make an identification?]
[• How confident was the witness in making the identification?]
[• Did the witness receive information before or after the
identification that may have increased the witness’s level of
confidence?]
[• Did the police use procedures that increased the witness’s level of
confidence about the identification?]
[•
<insert other relevant factors raised by the evidence>.]]
The People have the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that
it was the defendant who committed the crime. If the People have not
met this burden, you must find the defendant not guilty.
New January 2006; Revised June 2007, March 2022
BENCH NOTES
Instructional Duty
The court has no sua sponte duty to give an instruction on eyewitness testimony.
(People v. Richardson (1978) 83 Cal.App.3d 853, 863 [148 Cal.Rptr. 120],
disapproved on other grounds by People v. Saddler (1979) 24 Cal.3d 671, 682 [156
Cal.Rptr. 871, 597 P.2d 130].) An instruction relating eyewitness identification to
reasonable doubt, including any relevant “pinpoint” factors, must be given by the
trial court on request “[w]hen an eyewitness identification of the defendant is a key
element of the prosecution’s case but is not substantially corroborated by evidence
giving it independent reliability.” (People v. Wright (1988) 45 Cal.3d 1126,
1143–1144 [248 Cal.Rptr. 600, 755 P.2d 1049], quoting People v. McDonald (1984)
37 Cal.3d 351, 377 [208 Cal.Rptr. 236, 690 P.2d 709], overruled on other grounds in
People v. Mendoza (2000) 23 Cal.4th 896, 914 [98 Cal.Rptr.2d 431, 4 P.3d 265];
People v. Fudge (1994) 7 Cal.4th 1075, 1110 [31 Cal.Rptr.2d 321, 875 P.2d 36];
CALCRIM No. 315
EVIDENCE
86

People v. Palmer (1984) 154 Cal.App.3d 79, 89 [203 Cal.Rptr. 474] [error to refuse
defendant’s requested instruction on eyewitness testimony].)
Whenever there is evidence a witness has expressed certainty about an identification,
give the bracketed language beginning with “How certain was the witness” and the
bracketed paragraph that begins with “A witness’s expression of certainty” along
with any applicable bracketed factors.
Whenever there is evidence a witness has expressed doubt about an identification,
give the bracketed language beginning with “How certain was the witness” upon
request, and do not give the bracketed paragraph that begins with “A witness’s
expression of c