4006. Sufficiency of Indirect Circumstantial Evidence
This is a California Jury Instructions form that can be used for Lanterman-Petris-Short Act.
Last updated: 1/8/2014
4006. Sufficiency of Indirect Circumstantial Evidence Instruction No 1 Request by Plaintiff Given as Proposed Refused Withdrawn Request by Defendant Given as Modified Requested by Given on Court's Motion Judge Instruction No 1 You may not decide that [name of respondent] is gravely disabled based substantially on indirect evidence unless this evidence: 1. Is consistent with the conclusion that [name of respondent] is gravely disabled due to [a mental disorder/impairment by chronic alcoholism]; and Cannot be explained by any other reasonable conclusion. 2. If the indirect evidence suggests two reasonable interpretations, one of which suggests the existence of a grave disability and the other its nonexistence, then you must accept the interpretation that suggests [name of respondent] is not gravely disabled. If, on the other hand, one interpretation of this evidence appears to you to be reasonable and the other interpretation to be unreasonable, you must accept the reasonable interpretation and reject the unreasonable one. If you base your verdict on indirect evidence, [name of petitioner] must prove beyond a reasonable doubt each fact essential to your conclusion that [name of respondent] is gravely disabled. ________________________________________________________________________________ New June 2005