Return to CALJIC Part 5-8 – Contents
F 8.65 n1 Death Of Intended Victim Does Not Preclude Transferring Intent To Unintended Victim.
People v. Bland (2002) 28 C4th 313, 326 [121 CR2d 546] disapproved People v. Birreuta (84) 162 CA3d 454, 458-63 [208 CR 635], and concluded that intent to kill transfers to an unintended homicide victim even if the intended target is killed. (28 C4th at 326; see also People v. Gomez (2003) 107 CA4th 328 [131 CR2d 848] [Bland is fully retroactive].) (See FORECITE F 17.02 n14.)
However, transferred intent does not apply to attempted murder. (See FORECITE F 8.66 n 16.)
[Research Note: See FORECITE BIBLIO 8.65]
F 8.65 n2 Transferred Intent: GBI Enhancement Distinguished.
A GBI enhancement (PC 12022.7) may be found even though a person other than the intended victim is injured. (Calderon 232 CA3d at 937.) However, this result is founded upon the statutory language, not transferred intent. (Ibid.)
[Research Note: See FORECITE BIBLIO 8.65]
F 8.65 n3 Self-Defense May Be Transferred.
See FORECITE F 5.12b.
People v. Lee (94) 28 CA4th 1724, 1737 [34 CR2d 723] held that the doctrine of transferred intent does not apply to assault because there is no specific intent to transfer. (See also, People v. Lee DEPUBLISHED (93) 18 CA4th 913, 917 [22 CR2d 849].)
[Research Note: See FORECITE BIBLIO 8.65]
F 8.65 n4 Transferred Intent Allows Conviction Of Attempted Murder As To Intended Victim And Murder As To Unintended Victim Who Is Killed.
People v. Scott (96) 14 C4th 544 [59 CR2d 178] held that when a person shoots and misses one person with an intent to kill and kills a bystander instead, the person may be held accountable for both attempted murder as to the intended victim and murder as to the unintended victim under the transferred intent doctrine. This is so even though it could result in differing punishments for two individuals with the same “blameworthy mental state” as pointed out by Justice Mosk in his concurring opinion. (Scott, 14 C4th at 555-56, concurring opinion.)
F 8.65 n5 Is Transferred Intent Applicable To Assault?
(See FORECITE F 9.00 n5.)
F 8.65 n6 Intent To Kill Multiple Victims: Inapplicability Of Transferred Intent.
Where a single act is alleged to be intended to harm two or more people, the intent should be evaluated independently as to each victim, and the jury should not be instructed to transfer intent from one to the other. (People v. Czahara (88) 203 CA3d 1468, 1475 [250 CR 836]; see also People v. Andrews (97) 52 CA4th 714, 719 [60 CR2d 766] [swinging bottle at two victims was sufficient to establish two assaults]; People v. Chinchilla (97) 52 CA4th 683, 691 [60 CR2d 761] [firing single bullet at two people allows jury to infer that defendant intended to kill both]; People v. Calderon (91) 232 CA3d 930, 936 [283 CR 833]; see also FORECITE F 8.65 n1.)
F 8.65a
Transferred Self-Defense
*Modify CJ 8.65 to provide as follows when appropriate:
(See FORECITE F 5.12b.)
