CALCRIM No. 300. All Available Evidence

Judicial Council of California Criminal Jury Instructions (2023 edition)

Download PDF
300.All Available Evidence
Neither side is required to call all witnesses who may have information
about the case or to produce all physical evidence that might be relevant.
New January 2006
Instructional Duty
The court is not required to give this instruction sua sponte; however, it should be
given on request. (See generally Pen. Code, §§ 1093(f), 1127; People v. Pitts (1990)
223 Cal.App.3d 606, 880, 881 [273 Cal.Rptr. 757].)
Instructional Requirements. People v. Simms (1970) 10 Cal.App.3d 299, 313 [89
Cal.Rptr. 1].
This Instruction Upheld. People v. Ibarra (2007) 156 Cal.App.4th 1174,
1189-1190 [67 Cal.Rptr.3d 871].
Willful Suppression of or Failure to Obtain Evidence
Willful suppression of evidence by the government constitutes a denial of a fair trial
and of due process. (People v. Noisey (1968) 265 Cal.App.2d 543, 549-550 [71
Cal.Rptr. 339].) Likewise, willful failure by investigating officers to obtain evidence
that would clear a defendant would amount to a denial of due process of law. (Ibid.)
However, failure to look for evidence is different from suppressing known evidence
and “the mere fact that investigating officers did not pursue every possible means of
investigation of crime does not, standing alone, constitute denial of due process or
suppression of evidence.” (Ibid.; see also People v. Tuthill (1947) 31 Cal.2d 92,
97-98 [187 P.2d 16], overruled on other grounds as noted by People v. Balderas
(1985) 41 Cal.3d 144, 182 [222 Cal.Rptr. 184, 711 P.2d 480] [“[t]here is no
compulsion on the prosecution to call any particular witness or to make any
particular tests so long as there is fairly presented to the court the material evidence
bearing upon the charge for which the defendant is on trial.”].)
4 Millman, Sevilla & Tarlow, California Criminal Defense Practice, Ch. 82,
Witnesses, Ch. 83, Evidence (Matthew Bender).

© Judicial Council of California.