WILLFULLY FALSE STATEMENTS--ABSENCE OF FLIGHT
CALCRIM 362 (formerly CALJIC 2.03) tells the jury that they can consider a willfully false or deliberately misleading pretrial statement made by the def. in order to show consciousness of guilt, but that the jury can't convict solely based on such a statement.
The Court of Appeal rejects a challenge to CALCRIM 362, saying that it doesn't unfairly pinpoint one piece of evidence.
On a second issue, the Court of Appeal says that the court doesn't have a sua sponte duty to instruct on lack of flight by the defendant.
Comment: We search high and low for the case that says that the judge does have to instruct the jury that lack of flight shows consciousness of innocence, because the other side gets the opposite instruction that goes against us. But there's no such case. The closest is People v. Williams, 55 Cal.App.4th 648, which says that the judge has discretion to give such an instruction.
People v. McGowan; 2008 DJ DAR 3393; DJ, 3/11/08; C/A 3rd
