CALCRIM (Jury Instructions) Section 3226. • “Particularly Vulnerable” Defined. People v. DeHoyos (2013) 57 Cal.4th 79, 154–155 [158 Cal.Rptr.3d 797, 303 P.3d 1];
CALCRIM (Jury Instructions) § 3226
•
“Particularly Vulnerable” Defined. People v. DeHoyos (2013) 57 Cal.4th 79,
154–155 [158 Cal.Rptr.3d 797, 303 P.3d 1]; People v. Spencer (1996) 51
Cal.App.4th 1208, 1223 [59 Cal.Rptr.2d 627]; People v. Price (1984) 151
Cal.App.3d 803, 814 [199 Cal.Rptr. 99]; People v. Ramos (1980) 106
Cal.App.3d 591, 607 [165 Cal.Rptr. 179]; People v. Smith (1979) 94 Cal.App.3d
433, 436 [156 Cal.Rptr. 502].
•
Vulnerability Cannot Be Based Solely on Age if Age Is Element of Offense.
People v. Dancer (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 1677, 1693–1694 [53 Cal.Rptr.2d 282],
disapproved on other grounds in People v. Hammon (1997) 15 Cal.4th 1117,
1123 [65 Cal.Rptr.2d 1, 938 P.2d 986]; People v. Quinones (1988) 202
Cal.App.3d 1154, 1159 [249 Cal.Rptr. 435], disapproved on other grounds in
People v. Soto (2011) 51 Cal.4th 229, 244–245 [119 Cal.Rptr.3d 775, 245 P.3d
410]; People v. Ginese (1981) 121 Cal.App.3d 468, 476–477 [175 Cal.Rptr.
383]; People v. Flores (1981) 115 Cal.App.3d 924, 927 [171 Cal.Rptr. 777].
•
Factor in Vehicular Manslaughter. People v. Piceno (1987) 195 Cal.App.3d 1353,
1358–1359 [241 Cal.Rptr. 391] [vehicular manslaughter victim cannot be
particularly vulnerable]; People v. Weaver (2007) 149 Cal.App.4th 1301,
1315–1319 [58 Cal.Rptr.3d 18] [vehicular manslaughter victim can be
particularly vulnerable], disapproved on another ground in People v. Cook (2015)
60 Cal.4th 922 [183 Cal.Rptr.3d 502, 342 P.3d 404]; People v. Nicolas (2017) 8
Cal.App.5th 1165, 1182 [214 Cal.Rptr.3d 467] [vehicular manslaughter victim
can be particularly vulnerable].).
COMMENTARY
Distinctively Worse Than the Ordinary
The committee is aware of Johnson v. United States (2015) 576 U.S. 591, 597–598
[135 S.Ct. 2551, 192 L.Ed.2d 569], in which the United States Supreme Court held
that determining what constitutes an “ordinary” violation of a criminal statute may
create a constitutional vagueness problem. Nevertheless, in light of California case
law that has never been disapproved (see, e.g., People v. Moreno, supra, 128
Cal.App.3d at p. 110), the committee has elected to include in the instruction the
state law requirement that an aggravating factor may not be found to be true unless
the defendant’s conduct was distinctively worse than an ordinary commission of the
underlying crime.
RELATED ISSUES
Prohibition Against Dual Use of Facts at Sentencing
The jury may find true multiple aggravating factors based on the same underlying
fact. However, at sentencing, a single underlying fact may not support more than
one aggravating factor. (People v. Fernandez (1990) 226 Cal.App.3d 669, 680 [276
Cal.Rptr. 631].)
ENHANCEMENTS AND SENTENCING FACTORS
CALCRIM No. 3226
939
This section of the CALCRIM (Jury Instructions) establishes legal requirements and provisions that apply to specific circumstances in California law.
This section applies when the specific conditions outlined in the statute are met. The exact applicability depends on the facts of each situation.
Penalties vary based on the specific violation and circumstances. They may include fines, imprisonment, or other legal consequences as specified in the California code.
Side-by-side with Westlaw and LexisNexis
| Feature | FlawFinder | Westlaw | LexisNexis |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly price | $19 - $99 | $133 - $646 | $153 - $399 |
| Contract | None | 1-3 year min | 1-6 year min |
| Hidden fees | $0, always | Up to $469/search | $25/mo + per-doc |
| Police SOPs | ✓ 310+ departments | ✗ | ✗ |
| Zero-hallucination AI | ✓ CitationGuard | ✗ | ✗ |
| Cancel | One click | Termination fees | No option to cancel |
In simple terms: CALCRIM (Jury Instructions) Section 3226. • “Particularly Vulnerable” Defined. People v. DeHoyos (2013) 57 Cal.4th 79, 154–155 [158 Cal.Rptr.3d 797, 303 P.3d 1];. This means people must follow this rule, and breaking it can lead to criminal penalties.