CC Imperfect Self Defense Instruction: Error Identified By Court Of Appeal
June 22nd, 2015
People v. Por Ye Heri (2009) 181 Cal. App. 4th 349, identified the following error in CC 571: “For killing to be in self-defense, the defendant must actually and reasonably believe in the need to defend. [Citation.] If the belief subjectively exists but is objectively unreasonable, there is imperfect self-defense. . .]Citation.] Where, as […]
Tags: CC 571, Imperfect Self Defense
Whether Defendant May Be Convicted Based Only on an Admission/Confession
June 15th, 2015
CC 359 is deficient to the extent it lends itself to an interpretation that criminal defendants could be convicted on the basis of extrajudicial statements alone that they committed a crime. (People v. Rivas (2013) 214 Cal. App. 4th 1410.) The first paragraph of CC 359 correctly informed the jury that, “A defendant may […]
Tags: CC 359, Defendant's Out Of Court Statements
Accident as Defense Theory: Not Required Sua Sponte
June 12th, 2015
When the defense theory of accident is an attempt to negate the intent element of the crime, the trial judge has no sua sponte duty to give CC 3404. (CC 3404 Bench Notes, Citing People v. Anderson (2011) 51 Cal. 4th 989, 997-998.)
Tags: Accident, CC 3404, Defense Theory Instructions, Judge Duty to Instruct, Sua Sponte
Duress Is Not a Defense to Murder
June 8th, 2015
Duress is not a defense to murder, and will not reduce murder to manslaughter. (People v. Burney (2010) 47 Cal. 4th 203.) However, duress may negate the deliberation or premeditation required for first degree murder, and a modified version of this instruction may be appropriate if warranted by the circumstances of a case. (CCJICH […]
Tags: CC 3402, Defense Theory Instructions, Duress
CC 3471 Is Superfluous When Self Defense Instructions (CC 3470, CC 3472, CC 3474) Are Given
June 5th, 2015
CC 3471, explaining to the jury when a defendant engaged in mutual combat can lawfully use force in self-defense, need not be given when the jury is already being provided standard self defense instructions, such as CC 3470, CC 3472, and CC 3474. As People v. Johnson (2009) 180 Cal. App. 4th 702, explained, […]
Tags: CC 3470, CC 3471, CC 3472, CC 3474, Self Defense
Involuntary Unconsciousness from Prescription Medication
June 1st, 2015
The Mathson case makes it clear that if a defendant did not know and could not have reasonably known that his use of Ambien could cause sleep driving, this was involuntary intoxication and the resulting unconsciousness was a complete defense to driving under the influence. (People v. Mathson (2012) 210 Cal. App. 4th 1297.)
Tags: CC 3425, Defense Theory: Intoxication, Defense Theory: Unconsciousness
CC 3425 Unconsciousness: Improper Presumption of Consciousness
May 29th, 2015
In response, CC 3425 was revised. As explained by the Committee, “In People v. Mathson, [] the Court of Appeal concluded that because the instruction’s standard concluding language on reasonable doubt said ‘if, however’ instead of ‘unless,’ it was ‘unnecessarily ambiguous.’ The court also suggested adding an explanation that only involuntary intoxication is the […]
Tags: CC 3425, Defense Theory: Unconsciousness, Inferences and Presumptions
Court of Appeal Identifies Flaws in Unconsciousness Instruction
May 25th, 2015
People Mathson (2012) 210 Cal. App. 4th 1297, disapproved CC 3425 with respect to the portion that reads, “If there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant acted as if he were conscious, you should conclude that he was legally conscious.” The Court of Appeal noted two problems: (1) The instruction is ambiguous […]
Tags: CC 3425, Defense Theory: Unconsciousness
Mere Knowledge and “Failure to Prevent” Instructions
May 22nd, 2015
Failure to prevent a crime is not enough to make a person an aider and mere knowledge that another is going to commit a crime is not enough to make a person an aider. “Neither his mere presence at the scene of the crime nor his failure, through fear, to prevent a crime establishes, […]
Tags: Accomplice Liability, Aider and Abettor, CC 404, Defense Theory: Mens Rea/Intent
Natural and Probable Consequences: Aider and Abettor Need Not Reasonably Foresee Attempted Murder
May 18th, 2015
People v. Favor (2012) 54 Cal. 4th 868, 879-880, held that when applying the natural and probable consequences doctrine to a premeditation allegation under PC 664(a), the jury must initially find that an aider and abettor committed an attempted murder. The jury then must determine if the attempted murder was willful, deliberate, and premeditated. […]
Tags: Accomplice Liability, Aider and Abettor, CC 402
