CALCRIM No. 2690

§§ 415(3), 415.5(a)(3))

The defendant is charged [in Count] with disturbing the peace

[in violation of <insert appropriate code section[s]>].

To prove that the defendant is guilty of this crime, the People must

prove that:

1. The defendant used offensive words that were inherently likely to

provoke an immediate violent reaction;

[AND]

2. When the defendant used those words, (he/she) was (in a public

place/in a building or on the grounds of <insert

description of school from Pen. Code, § 415.5>)(;/.)

<Give element 3 when instructing on Pen. Code, § 415.5(f).>

[AND

3. The defendant was not (a registered student of the school/ [or] a

person engaged in lawful employee-related activity).]

A person uses offensive words inherently likely to provoke an immediate

violent reaction if:

1. He or she says something that is reasonably likely to provoke

someone else to react violently;

AND

2. When he or she makes that statement, there is a clear and

present danger that the other person will immediately erupt into

violence.

In deciding whether the People have proved both of these factors,

consider all the circumstances in which the statement was made and the

person to whom the statement was addressed.

The People do not have to prove that the defendant intended to provoke

a violent response.

<Defense: Good Faith Belief Language Not Likely to Provoke>

[The defendant is not guilty of this crime if (he/she) reasonably and

actually believed that the language (he/she) used was not inherently

likely to provoke an immediate violent reaction. The People have the

burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not

reasonably and actually believe this to be true. If the People have not

met this burden, you must find the defendant not guilty of this crime.]

New January 2006