CALCRIM No. 375

Common Plan, etc.

<Introductory Sentence Alternative A—evidence of other offense admitted>

[The People presented evidence that the defendant [may have]

committed ((another/other) offense[s]/the offense[s] of

<insert description of alleged offense[s]>) that (was/were) not charged in

this case.]

<Introductory Sentence Alternative B—evidence of other act admitted>

[The People presented evidence (of other behavior by the defendant that

was not charged in this case/that the defendant <insert

description of alleged conduct admitted under Evid. Code, § 1101(b)>).]

Y ou may consider this evidence only if the People have proved by a

preponderance of the evidence that the defendant in fact committed the

(uncharged offense[s]/act[s]). Proof by a preponderance of the evidence is

a different burden of proof than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. A fact

is proved by a preponderance of the evidence if you conclude that the

fact is more likely than not to be true.

If the People have not met this burden, you must disregard this evidence

entirely.

If you decide that the defendant committed the (uncharged offense[s]/

act[s]), you may, but are not required to, consider that evidence for the

limited purpose of deciding whether:

<Select specific grounds of relevance and delete all other options>

<A. Identity>

[The defendant was the person who committed the offense[s] alleged

in this case](./; or)

<B. Intent>

[The defendant acted with the intent to <insert specific

intent required to prove the offense[s] alleged> in this case](./; or)

<C. Motive>

[The defendant had a motive to commit the offense[s] alleged in this

case](./; or)

<D. Knowledge>

[The defendant knew <insert knowledge required to prove

the offense[s] alleged> when (he/she) allegedly acted in this case](./;

or)

<E. Accident>

[The defendant’s alleged actions were not the result of mistake or

accident](./; or)

<F. Common Plan>

[The defendant had a plan [or scheme] to commit the offense[s]

alleged in this case](./; or)

<G. Consent>

[The defendant reasonably and in good faith believed that

<insert name or description of complaining witness>

consented](./; or)

<H. Other Purpose>

[The defendant <insert description of other permissible

purpose; see Evid. Code, § 1101(b)>.]

[In evaluating this evidence, consider the similarity or lack of similarity

between the uncharged (offense[s]/ [and] act[s]) and the charged

offense[s].]

Do not consider this evidence for any other purpose [except for the

limited purpose of <insert other permitted purpose, e.g.,

determining the defendant’s credibility>].

[Do not conclude from this evidence that the defendant has a bad

character or is disposed to commit crime.]

If you conclude that the defendant committed the (uncharged offense[s]/

act[s]), that conclusion is only one factor to consider along with all the

other evidence. It is not sufficient by itself to prove that the defendant is

guilty of <insert charge[s]> [or that the

<insert allegation[s]> has been proved]. The People must still prove (the/

each) (charge/ [and] allegation) beyond a reasonable doubt.

New January 2006; Revised April 2008, February 2016, August 2016, March 2023,

February 2026