CALCRIM No. 1851

Convictions (Pen. Code, § 666.1)

If you find the defendant guilty of (petty theft/[or] shoplifting), you

must then decide whether the People have proved the additional

allegation that the defendant was previously convicted of two or more

theft offenses. It has already been determined that the defendant is the

person named in exhibits <insert numbers or descriptions of

exhibits>. Y ou must decide whether the evidence proves that the

defendant was previously convicted of the alleged crimes.

The People allege that the defendant was previously convicted of:

1. A violation of <insert code section violated, as listed

in Pen. Code, § 666.1(a)(2)>, on <insert date of

conviction>, in the <insert name of court>, in Case

Number <insert docket or case number>;

[AND]

2. A violation of <insert code section violated, as listed

in Pen. Code, § 666.1(a)(2)>, on <insert date of

conviction>, in the <insert name of court>, in Case

Number <insert docket or case number>(;/.)

[AND

3. <Repeat for each prior conviction alleged>.]

[Consider the evidence presented on this allegation only when deciding

whether the defendant was previously convicted of the crimes alleged [or

for the limited purpose of <insert other permitted purpose,

e.g., assessing credibility of the defendant>]. Do not consider this evidence

for any other purpose.]

Y ou must consider each alleged conviction separately. The People have

the burden of proving this allegation beyond a reasonable doubt. If the

People have not met this burden, you must find that the allegation has

not been proved.

New October 2025