URIBE v. BABIENCO, C 13-01106 WHA. (2016)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20160726696
Visitors: 11
Filed: Jul. 25, 2016
Latest Update: Jul. 25, 2016
Summary: ORDER REGARDING JURY INSTRUCTION ON CREDIBILITY WILLIAM ALSUP , District Judge . At the final pretrial conference, counsel for defendant requested a jury instruction on credibility that would allow the jury to take into account plaintiff's incarceration. This request stood in contradiction to the concession that defendant would not seek to impeach plaintiff via prior convictions. After the hearing, the Court could not find any such proposed jury instruction and therefore required counsel fo
Summary: ORDER REGARDING JURY INSTRUCTION ON CREDIBILITY WILLIAM ALSUP , District Judge . At the final pretrial conference, counsel for defendant requested a jury instruction on credibility that would allow the jury to take into account plaintiff's incarceration. This request stood in contradiction to the concession that defendant would not seek to impeach plaintiff via prior convictions. After the hearing, the Court could not find any such proposed jury instruction and therefore required counsel for..
More
ORDER REGARDING JURY INSTRUCTION ON CREDIBILITY
WILLIAM ALSUP, District Judge.
At the final pretrial conference, counsel for defendant requested a jury instruction on credibility that would allow the jury to take into account plaintiff's incarceration. This request stood in contradiction to the concession that defendant would not seek to impeach plaintiff via prior convictions. After the hearing, the Court could not find any such proposed jury instruction and therefore required counsel for defendant to submit the proposed jury instruction by July 22, 2016, at noon.
The Court has now reviewed the materials submitted and finds the proposed instruction confusing and unwarranted. Counsel for defendant asked for a jury instruction based on Ninth Circuit Model Instruction 2.9, which has nothing to do with this case. The other proposed model jury instruction bears upon the First Amendment. This is not a First Amendment action. The proposed jury instruction regarding the credibility of the plaintiff will not be allowed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
