CACI 4012 Concluding Instruction
California Civil Jury Instructions CACI
4012 Concluding Instruction
To find that [name of respondent] is gravely disabled, all 12 jurors must agree on the verdict. To find that [name of respondent] is not gravely disabled, only 9 jurors must agree on the verdict.
As soon as you have agreed on a verdict, the presiding juror must date and sign the form and notify the [clerk/bailiff].
New June 2005; Revised May 2017
Directions for Use
Read this instruction immediately after CACI No. 5009, Predeliberation Instructions.
There are many votes that are possible other than a unanimous 12-0 vote for gravely disabled or a 9-3 or better vote for not gravely disabled. A vote other than one of these will result in a mistrial and the option to retry the proceeding.
Sources and Authority
•“The due process clause of the California Constitution requires that proof beyond a reasonable doubt and a unanimous jury verdict be applied to conservatorship proceedings under the LPS Act.” (Conservatorship of Roulet (1979) 23 Cal.3d 219, 235 [152 Cal.Rptr. 425, 590 P.2d 1].)
•“The LPS Act is silent as to whether the jury must unanimously agree on the issue of grave disability. ‘[H]owever, the Act incorporates by reference Probate Code procedures for conservatorships. The Probate Code provides for factual determinations by a three-fourths majority … . Thus, the Legislature has provided for less than unanimous jury verdicts in grave disability cases.’ ” (Conservatorship of Rodney M. (1996) 50 Cal.App.4th 1266, 1269 [58 Cal.Rptr.2d 513].)
•“The Legislature’s determination that a three-fourths majority vote applies in LPS conservatorship proceedings is eminently sound in the context of finding a proposed conservatee is not gravely disabled.” (Conservatorship of Rodney M., supra, 50 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1271–1272.)
•“Permitting a finding of no grave disability to be based on a three-fourths majority coincides with Roulet’s goal of minimizing the risk of unjustified and needless conservatorships. It also avoids unnecessary confinement of the proposed conservatee while renewal proceedings are completed.” (Conservatorship of Rodney M., supra, 50 Cal.App.4th at p. 1270.)