SERIES 2100 VEHICLE OFFENSES
F 2160 Fleeing The Scene Following Accident: Enhancement For Vehicular Manslaughter (VC 20001(c))
TABLE OF CONTENTS
F 2160.1 Titles And Identification Of Parties
F 2160.1 Inst 1 Fleeing The Scene Following Accident: Enhancement For Vehicular Manslaughter—Title
F 2160.1 Inst 2 Identification Of Prosecution And Defendant
F 2160.2 Fleeing The Scene Following Accident: Enhancement For Vehicular Manslaughter—Tailoring To Facts: Persons, Places, Things And Theories [Reserved]
F 2160.3 Fleeing The Scene Following Accident: Enhancement For Vehicular Manslaughter—Language That Is Argumentative, Confusing, Etc.
F 2160.3 Inst 1 Deletion Of Argumentative Language: Collision Not Necessary
F 2160.3 Inst 2 Willfully: Argumentative
F 2160.4 Fleeing The Scene Following Accident: Enhancement For Vehicular Manslaughter—Burden Of Proof Issues
F 2160.4 Inst 1 Relating Prosecution Burden To Enumerated Elements
F 2160.5 Fleeing The Scene Following Accident: Enhancement For Vehicular Manslaughter—Elements And Definitions
F 2160.5 Inst 1 Willfully: Knowledge
F 2160.5 Inst 2 Incorporation Of Definition In Enumerated Elements; Separate Enumeration Of Combined Elements
F 2160.6 Fleeing The Scene Following Accident: Enhancement For Vehicular Manslaughter—Defense Theories
F 2160.6 Inst 1 Juror Consideration Of Whether Or Not There Was A Collision
F 2160.6 Inst 2 Willfully: Balance
F 2160.7 Fleeing The Scene Following Accident: Enhancement For Vehicular Manslaughter—Preliminary Fact Issues [Reserved]
F 2160.8 Fleeing The Scene Following Accident: Enhancement For Vehicular Manslaughter—Unanimity/Duplicity/Multiplicity [Reserved]
F 2160.9 Fleeing The Scene Following Accident: Enhancement For Vehicular Manslaughter—Lesser Offense Issues [Reserved]
F 2160 Notes
F 2160 Note 1 Fleeing The Scene Following Accident: Enhancement For Vehicular Manslaughter—CALCRIM Cross-References And Research Notes
Return to Series 2100 Table of Contents.
F 2160.1 Titles And Identification Of Parties
F 2160.1 Inst 1 Fleeing The Scene Following Accident: Enhancement For Vehicular Manslaughter—Title
See generally FORECITE F 200.1.2 Note 2, CALCRIM Motion Bank # CCM-002, CCM-003, and CCM-004.
F 2160.1 Inst 2 Identification Of Prosecution And Defendant
See generally FORECITE F 100.2 Note 1and CALCRIM Motion Bank # CCM-005 and CALCRIM Motion Bank # CCM-006.
F 2160.2 Fleeing The Scene Following Accident: Enhancement For Vehicular Manslaughter—Tailoring To Facts: Persons, Places, Things And Theories [Reserved]
F 2160.3 Fleeing The Scene Following Accident: Enhancement For Vehicular Manslaughter—Language That Is Argumentative, Confusing, Etc.
F 2160.3 Inst 1 Deletion Of Argumentative Language: Collision Not Necessary
*Delete CC 2160, paragraph 5, sentence 2, which provides:
It is not necessary for the driver’s vehicle to collide with another vehicle or person.
Points and Authorities
See FORECITE F 415.3 Inst 4.
STRATEGY NOTE AND CAVEAT—Objection to specific instruction on matters which the prosecution does not have to prove may open the door, in the judge’s view, to prosecutorial objection to specific evidence instructions on matters which are not alone sufficient to prove guilt. (See listing of such instructions at FORECITE PG XI(D)(2).) Although the considerations should be different due to the presumptions of innocence (see e.g., FORECITE F 100.1 Inst 1), the judge may not see it this way. In this light, an alternative approach could be a request that the instruction be balanced and clarified to assure the jurors do consider the specified matter in determining whether the prosecution has proven all essential facts and elements of the charged offense. (See FORECITE F 402.5 Inst 6.)
Additionally, if the judge rejects a defense request to delete or balance argumentative language that favors the prosecution, this may provide a basis for requesting argumentative language favoring the defendant in another instruction. [See generally FORECITE F 416.3 Inst 4.]
Alternatively, balancing language should be added. (See FORECITE F 2160.6 Inst 1.)
F 2160.3 Inst 2 Willfully: Argumentative
See FORECITE F 820.3 Inst 1.
F 2160.4 Fleeing The Scene Following Accident: Enhancement For Vehicular Manslaughter—Burden Of Proof Issues
F 2160.4 Inst 1 Relating Prosecution Burden To Enumerated Elements
See FORECITE F 400.4 Inst 1.
F 2160.5 Fleeing The Scene Following Accident: Enhancement For Vehicular Manslaughter—Elements And Definitions
F 2160.5 Inst 1 Willfully: Knowledge
See FORECITE F 820.5 Inst 1.
F 2160.5 Inst 2 Incorporation Of Definition In Enumerated Elements; Separate Enumeration Of Combined Elements
*Modify CC 2160, Element 1 & 2, as follows [added language is underlined; deleted language is stricken]:
1. The defendant knew that (he/she) had been involved in connected with an accident that injured another person in a natural and logical manner;
AND
2. The defendant knew that the accident injured another person [or knew from the nature of the accident that it was probable that another person had been injured];
AND
2 3. The defendant willfully failed to stop immediately at the scene of the accident (his/her) vehicle as soon as reasonably possible under the circumstances;
AND
4. The defendant did so willfully.
[Delete paragraphs 4, 5 & 6.]
…
Points and Authorities
Incorporation Of Definitions In Enumerated Elements—The definitions of “stop immediately” (CC 2160, paragraph 4) and “involved in an accident” (CC 2160, paragraph 5) should be included in the enumerated elements to which they relate. (See CALCRIM User’s Guide, “Titles and Definitions,” p. 2.)
[See also FORECITE F 417.5 Inst 2.]
Separate Enumeration Of Willfully Element—See FORECITE F 840.5 Inst 3.
F 2160.6 Fleeing The Scene Following Accident: Enhancement For Vehicular Manslaughter—Defense Theories
F 2160.6 Inst 1 Juror Consideration Of Whether Or Not There Was A Collision
*Add to CC 2160, paragraph 5:
Alternative a [fact not disputed]:
However, the fact that the defendant’s vehicle did not collide with another vehicle or person is a circumstance to consider in evaluating whether the prosecution has proven [all the elements of the alleged _______________] [_______________ <insert specific element to which the evidence relates>.
Alternative b [fact disputed]:
However, whether or not the defendant’s vehicle did not collide with another vehicle or person is a circumstance to consider in evaluating whether the prosecution has proven [all the elements of the alleged _______________] [_____________ <insert specific element to which the evidence relates>.
Points and Authorities
See FORECITE F 416.3 Inst 7.
F 2160.6 Inst 2 Willfully: Balance
See FORECITE F 820.3 Inst 2.
F 2160.7 Fleeing The Scene Following Accident: Enhancement For Vehicular Manslaughter—Preliminary Fact Issues[Reserved]
F 2160.8 Fleeing The Scene Following Accident: Enhancement For Vehicular Manslaughter—Unanimity/Duplicity/Multiplicity [Reserved]
F 2160.9 Fleeing The Scene Following Accident: Enhancement For Vehicular Manslaughter—Lesser Offense Issues[Reserved]
F 2160 NOTES
F 2160 Note 1 Fleeing The Scene Following Accident: Enhancement For Vehicular Manslaughter—CALCRIM Cross-References And Research Notes
CALCRIM Cross-References:
See FORECITE F 2140 Notes.
CALCRIM 2140 [Failure To Perform Duty Following Accident: Death Or Injury — Defendant Driver]
CALCRIM 2141 [Failure To Perform Duty Following Accident: Death Or Injury — Defendant Nondriving Owner Or Passenger In Control]
CALCRIM 2150 [Failure To Perform Duty Following Accident: Property Damage — Defendant Driver]
CALCRIM 2151 [Failure To Perform Duty Following Accident: Property Damage—Defendant Nondriving Owner Or Passenger In Control]
Research Notes:
See CLARAWEB Forum, Vehicle Offenses—Series 2100.
