Sufficiency of Evidence (Murder)
Category > Sufficiency of Evidence (Murder)
Updated 3/4/2024Defendant’s youth at the time of the offense should be considered in determining whether he acted with reckless indifference to human life under section 190.2 (d). A defendant’s youth at the time of the offense should be a factor in determining whether defendant acted with reckless indifference to human life under Penal Code section 190.2 (d). Considering the totality of the circumstances, including that defendant was only 16 at the time of the offenses, in light of People v. Banks (2015) 61 Cal.4th 788, and People v. Clark (2016) 63 Cal.4th 522, and their progeny, the evidence was insufficient to establish that defendant acted with reckless indifference to human life. The robbery-murder special circumstance was vacated.id: 27483
Updated 2/24/2024Evidence was insufficient to show premeditation and deliberation for first degree murder where defendant took a gun from someone during an argument and shot the victim in the head at close range.There was insufficient evidence of premeditation and deliberation to support the first degree murder conviction. There was no evidence of a pre-existing intent to kill the victim even though defendant made an obscure reference to killing someone in a text message during an argument with his girlfriend. The evidence of motive was weak where defendant had threatened to kill the victim in a statement to a third person, but such a threat did not establish a motive to kill. The only evidence of motive was the fact that defendant and the victim had an unresolved falling out of some kind. And there was no evidence of planning where the shooting was an impulsive act where defendant took the gun from someone else and shot the victim in the head during an argument.id: 26637
Updated 2/4/2024There was insufficient evidence to support the conspiracy to commit murder conviction; where there was an agreement to kill rivals but defendant (a gang member) had no record of violence and state presented social media posts celebrating violence against gang rivals.Evidence was insufficient to support defendant’s conviction for conspiracy to commit murder. The conspiracy consisted of a two-year agreement among 20 gang members to kill rival gang members although no details were included. There was no evidence that defendant participated in any violent acts. The prosecution’s case against him consisted of evidence of his membership in the gang, access to weapons, and social media posts celebrating violence against rival gangs.id: 27606
The evidence was insufficient to support first degree murder where it only showed defendant aided and abetted an assault with a firearm.The evidence established defendant aided and abetted an assault with a firearm in the carport area but there was little more than speculation to suggest he pulled the trigger or that he willfully, deliberately or with premeditation aided or encouraged the commission of murder. The evidence was insufficient to support the first degree murder conviction.id: 25152
The evidence was insufficient to support the second degree murder convictions for the defendants who were present for the assault, fled and lied to the police.Evidence was insufficient to support the second degree murder convictions of Flores and Espinoza. The fact that they were present when the assault occurred, were companions of a perpetrator, left the scene after the murder and lied to police was not enough to inspire confidence in their guilt.id: 25153
The evidence supported self-defense and voluntary manslaughter instructions where defendants entered the victim's house intending only to retrieve a pager and perhaps engage in a fistfight.Evidence showed the defendants intended to retrieve a pager belonging to one defendant from the defendant's house, and perhaps to engage in a fistfight. After the victim swung a baseball bat, one defendant stabbed him. The court erred in refusing to instruct on self-defense and voluntary manslaughter. The error was prejudicial where it was reasonably probable that the jury would have reached a different verdict if it had known of the option to convict the defendants of the lesser included offenses.id: 15446
Absent any evidence of planning or reflection, the evidence was insufficient to support a conviction of first degree murder. The evidence was sufficient to show defendant killed the victim, with malice aforethought, but insufficient to show premeditation. There was no evidence of planning and little or no evidence of a motive to kill. The fact that defendant shot the victim in the face suggested there may have been time for reflection. The first degree murder conviction was reduced to second degree.id: 23405
Evidence supported only a single count of attempted murder where defendant fired a single shot at a group of people targeting no one but striking a single officer. Defendant fired a bullet from a car at a group of police officers who were congregated in a dimly lit parking lot. Evidence showed defendant believed he was firing at a rival gang but he targeted no specific person. The bullet hit one officer in the hand. He was convicted of seven counts of attempted premeditated murder of a police officer. However, the evidence supported only a single count of attempted premeditated murder of a police officer.id: 21708
Minor was wrongly found to have assisted a suicide under section 401 where the suicide attempt failed.Minor was alleged to have willfully and deliberately aided, advised or encouraged a suicide in violation of Penal Code section 401. However, the juvenile petition was wrongly sustained because the victim's suicide attempt failed, despite the minor's active encouragement and furnishing the intended means of suicide. The minor's actions did amount to a culpable attempt to deliberately aid, advise or encourage another to commit suicide.id: 16529
Aiding and abetting a misdemeanor cannot result in a second degree murder conviction.Defendant was convicted of several offenses including second degree murder following a drunken melee that left one person dead. The jury was instructed as to the elements of two misdemeanors <197> Penal Code section 12031 (carrying a loaded firearm on a public street) and section 417 (exhibiting a firearm in a threatening manner) and was asked to determine whether the crime of second degree murder was a natural and probable consequence of defendant's act of aiding and abetting his brother in the commission of the two misdemeanors. However, under the natural and probable consequences doctrine, the violation of a misdemeanor will support a conviction of manslaughter, but not one for second or first degree murder.id: 10266
Notwithstanding the presence of a faint heartbeat the People failed to show the infant/fetus was born alive for purposes of gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated.Defendant drunk driver collided with another vehicle driven by a woman who was eight and one-half months pregnant. An emergency delivery ensued at the hospital and while the fetus/infant was not breathing or moving, there was a faint heartbeat. The fetus/infant was declared dead several minutes later. The People argued the court erred in setting aside the information charging defendant with gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated arguing that the infant/fetus was born alive and thus a human being within the meaning of the manslaughter statutes. However, there was no evidence of breathing or brain activity. While this lack of evidence did not establish that the fetus/infant was born dead, it also did not establish it was born alive. The People failed to carry their burden of producing evidence that the infant/fetus was born alive.id: 10298
Updated 3/6/2024Evidence supported implied malice finding where the defendant sucker-punched the victim who was standing on a concrete sidewalk.Defendant was convicted of second degree murder. Evidence was sufficient to support the finding of implied malice where defendant sucker-punched the victim who was standing on a concrete sidewalk and then walked away as the victim was on the ground bleeding from his ears, mouth and the back of his head.id: 26598
Updated 3/4/2024Evidence that the intoxicated defendant accelerated through the turn thereafter striking the child supported the finding of implied malice for purposes of Watson murder.Defendant was convicted of second degree implied malice (“Watson”) murder after killing a child pedestrian while drunk driving. Evidence supported the finding of implied malice as it showed he accelerated during a turn. While he argued the car's brakes were not working properly there was testimony at trial that the steering and brakes worked fine.id: 28162
Updated 2/26/2024Evidence supported the attempted murder convictions involving five unnamed rival gang members who were standing next to the murder victim.Defendant was convicted of one count of murder and five counts of premeditated attempted murder. He argued the evidence was insufficient to support the attempted murder counts because the five victims were unidentified and simply standing near the murder victim when defendant opened fire. However, the murder victim was the only intended target and the evidence supported the attempted murder convictions. Moreover, defendant said later that he shot at a group of rival gang members.id: 27254
Updated 2/24/2024Evidence supported the magistrate’s finding of malice for a caregiver who left the victim alone for two days during which time the victim died of an overdose.Defendant was the paid primary caretaker for a 69 year-old woman who was taking multiple depressants, and had been hospitalized for overdoses. The victim had also designated defendant as the beneficiary of her estate. Defendant left the victim home alone for at least two days, and during that time the victim died from an overdose of her medications. Defendant then began using the victim’s credit cards and bank account. She was charged with murder. Evidence supported the magistrate’s finding of malice as it showed an intent to kill where defendant left the victim alone under circumstances that were likely to lead to a fatal overdose. Implied malice was also shown as an overdose was a natural and probable consequence of leaving the victim alone under those circumstances, and defendant acted with conscious disregard of the danger.id: 26626
Updated 2/24/2024Defendant caretaker, who was charged with watching a woman who overdosed, proximately caused the death by leaving the victim alone for two days with access to her medications.Defendant was the caretaker of an elderly woman who died from a prescription-drug overdose during a two day period where defendant had left her alone. There was sufficient evidence presented at the preliminary hearing to show defendant proximately caused the victim’s death, even though the victim herself was an intervening cause. The overdose was foreseeable since the victim had overdosed previously, and defendant left her alone with access to the medications. At the very least, defendant should have kept the medication out of reach (perhaps leaving out of couple of doses), and this would have prevented the death - even if it was suicide. id: 26627
Updated 2/23/2024The coroner’s conclusion listing two causes of death was enough to support a murder theory as to one of them - namely that the victim was still alive when hit by the van.Defendant argued the jury might have convicted him of second degree murder on the theory that he killed the victim when he drove the van over him, but the evidence as to whether he was still alive at that moment was speculative. The coroner listed two causes of death - gunshot wounds, and blunt force trauma (from the van). A reasonable jury could have found the victim was still alive when hit by the van, and so evidence supported his conviction under that theory.id: 26787
Updated 2/22/2024Evidence supported the conspiracy to commit murder convictions for the three defendants who had agreed to kill Crip rivals, committed attempted murder, and spoke of Crip killing on social media.Evidence supported the defendant’s convictions for conspiracy to commit murder. The record showed the defendants and their coconspirators entered into an agreement to murder rival gang members. Even though a victim was not a rival Crips gang member, the expert testified the shooting was consistent with a hunting mission looking for a potential rival. The overt act requirement was satisfied by two of the defendants’ convictions for attempted murder. The third defendant had social media postings containing references to Crip killing.id: 26952
Updated 2/4/2024Evidence of defendant’s methodical attack of the victim supported the finding that the murder was premeditated.Defendant argued the evidence was insufficient to show the murder was premeditated, and instead showed he acted in a rash fit of rage. However, defendant committed the attack in stages striking the victim in the head, shoulders, and back, pulling out her hair, strangling or dragging her to the pool, strangling her there and leaving her in the pool face down. So the manner of killing supports premeditation, And there was strong evidence of motive where the victim had recently obtained a restraining order against him after she had mistreated his dogs. id: 27271
Updated 2/4/2024Evidence of erratic driving, stoned appearance and the THC levels supported defendant’s gross vehicular manslaughter conviction. Evidence supported defendant’s gross vehicular manslaughter conviction. The was substantial evidence showing he was under the influence as he drove through a parking gate arm where the victim was standing. His eyes were bloodshot, pupils dilated and his appearance was consistent with being under the influence of marijuana - body tremors, grayish lips. He also had high levels of THC in his system that would have been higher at the time of the accident than at the time tested.id: 27230
Updated 2/4/2024Evidence supported an implied malice murder conviction for defendant who punched and kicked a victim while other members of the gang assaulted the victim with weapons.Defendant joined in an “eight against one” gang assault resulting in death. While his cohorts used a bat, a shovel, and a knife, defendant pummeled the victim with his fists and feet. Evidence supported defendant’s conviction for implied malice murder.id: 27581
Updated 2/1/2024Evidence supported defendant’s conviction for murder by failing to act where she placed the victim alone in an apartment with phenobarbital knowing the victim had attempted to overdose three times.Evidence supported defendant’s first degree murder conviction on a theory of failure to act. Just days after making the defendant her sole beneficiary, defendant moved the victim out of a skilled nursing facility that managed her medication intake, and into an apartment where she predictably self-inflicted a fourth overdose of phenobarbital.id: 27921
Updated 2/1/2024Although neither defendant fired the fatal shot, their life threatening actions constituted proximate cause in support of the murder convictions.In a gun battle among rival gangs, the evidence showed the fatal shot was fired by someone other than the defendants who were convicted of murder. Although neither defendant fired the fatal shot, their life-threatening deadly actions constituted proximate cause that made them responsible for the murder. id: 27928
Updated 2/1/2024Defendant’s exceedingly reckless driving while high on marijuana supported his Watson murder conviction.Defendant was convicted of second degree murder (“Watson murder”) based on his driving while high on marijuana. Evidence was sufficient to establish implied malice, which supported the conviction where he was impaired, smoked marijuana at a car wash thus knowing he would be driving while impaired, drove in an exceedingly reckless manner at nearly 90 miles per hour through a red light, and received prior advice about the dangers of driving while intoxicated.id: 28006
Updated 1/31/2024Watson murder for drugged driving was supported by evidence that the defendant, while high, drove 90 miles per hour through a traffic light causing a fatal death.Evidence supported defendant’s conviction for second degree murder in a drugged driving case (where impairment levels are more difficult to determine) given the evidence that he was a chronic pot smoker, who had a pre-ingestion intent to drive, drove through a stoplight causing the fatal collision, and had been warned in a youth program and a driver's license application about the dangers of driving while high.id: 28030
Updated 1/29/2024A predrinking intent to drive is a relevant factor but not an element of Watson murder.Evidence supported defendant’s conviction for second degree “Watson murder” where defendant drank without intending to drive, and later drove while in an unconscious stupor causing a fatal collision. Predrinking intent to drive is not required before a jury may find implied malice.id: 28082
The evidence was sufficient to support the murder conviction even though the eyewitness gave conflicting statements to police and while testifying.Defendant argued the evidence was insufficient to support the murder conviction where the primary witness gave inconsistent statements, both to police, and on the stand as to whether she saw defendant shooting. However, on the stand the witness was reminded of her earlier statements and it was up to the jury to determine the credibility of her statements.id: 24720
The trial court in a murder retrial may not instruct the jury that the first trial resulted in a gross vehicular manslaughter conviction.During a retrial of a second degree murder charge, after a previous jury failed to reach a verdict on that charge but convicted the defendant of gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, the new jury should not be informed of the specific convictions that resulted from the first jury’s deliberations. The trial court may, upon request, give an instruction that would prevent the jury from wrongly assuming that an acquittal on the murder charge would result in the defendant escaping criminal liability altogether.id: 25473
Evidence supported the attempted murder of one victim and the murder of another while defendant fired one shot.Defendant argued the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction for the attempted murder of Jones. He fired a single shot at Oliviera, who he thought was Jones. While he made a mistake of fact in thinking he was firing at Jones, the evidence supports the attempted murder conviction of Jones as well as the murder of Oliviera.id: 25486
Shooting the gas station cashier who told defendant to wait for 10 minutes during a shift change did not support a heat of passion voluntary manslaughter instruction.The trial court did not err by refusing to instruct on heat of passion voluntary manslaughter. Jones told defendant that he’d have to wait 10 minutes, and held the door closed and swatted defendant’s hand. The ordinary person’s response would have been to walk away and wait, or walk away and drive to another gas station. Firing a shot at Jones in that situation did not support a heat of passion instruction. id: 25487
Expert testimony is not required in a criminal negligence case.Defendant worked for a contractor, was told by the city to stop a dangerous project, but continued instead, resulting in an accident that killed a worker. Defendant argued the evidence was insufficient to support his involuntary manslaughter conviction because the prosecution failed to present an expert witness to establish that he owed a duty of care to the victim. However, expert testimony is not required in a criminal negligence case, and defendant’s reliance on civil tort cases was not persuasive.id: 25405
Evidence supported the murder convictions under the provocative act doctrine where the jury could reasonably believe that even though he had been shot, Avery’s provocative act contributed to Brown’s death.Defendants participated in a botched robbery where an accomplice was shot and killed. They never entered the store but were convicted under the provocative acts doctrine. Defendants argued the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction. Two accomplices entered the store - Avery who was armed and Brown (the victim) who was not. Defendants argued that because the store employees shot and neutralized Avery before Brown charged them that Brown’s killing was no longer related to the robbery for purposes of the provocative acts doctrine. However, the jury could reasonably conclude that Avery’s provocative act contributed to Brown’s death.id: 25355
There was a sufficient causal relationship between defendant’s sex crimes with the unconscious victim and his failure to seek medical help to support his first degree felony murder conviction. Defendant sexually assaulted the victim while she was in a diabetic coma, and within two hours she died of ketoacidosis. Experts agreed the sex crimes didn’t contribute to her death. However, defendant didn’t merely sexually assault the victim, he failed to seek medical assistance knowing she was in dire physical condition - a fact that would remain hidden as long as she was in his hotel room. There was a sufficient causal relationship between defendant’s fatal omission and the sex crimes to support his conviction for first degree felony murder and the true finding on the felony-murder special circumstance allegation.id: 25341
Circumstantial evidence supported the murder conviction even though there was stronger circumstantial evidence that defendant’s cousin committed the murder.Defendant was convicted of murder after he was found to have planted a bomb in an irrigation pump that killed a farm-worker acquaintance. Circumstantial evidence supported the conviction as he was familiar with the victim’s routine, he had an aptitude and skill set for building the explosive device, and forensic experts connected him to a bomb diagram. Contrary to defendant’s claim, it did not matter that there was even stronger circumstantial evidence his cousin Peter had built the bomb that killed the victim.id: 24996
Evidence established implied malice where defendant fell asleep at the wheel due to methamphetamine withdrawals and caused a fatal accident.Substantial evidence supported the implied malice finding following defendant’s second degree murder conviction where he had several prior drunk driving convictions and fell asleep at the wheel while suffering from methamphetamine withdrawals.id: 24434
Evidence supported the implied malice second degree murder conviction of a federal correctional officer who was intoxicated and playing with his gun. A person acts with implied malice when he is under the influence of alcohol or drugs, engages in joking or horseplay with a firearm, and causes the discharge of the firearm killing another person. The evidence supported the second degree murder conviction of the defendant who killed a fellow federal correctional officers under these circumstances. id: 24106
Evidence supported gross vehicular manslaughter conviction for a defendant with a high blood alcohol content who violated speed and other traffic laws and drove into a tree. Evidence supported defendant’s gross vehicular manslaughter conviction. After violating numerous Vehicle Code provisions and driving 20 miles per hour over the speed limit, he crashed into a tree. The fact that he had a prior drunk driving conviction and attended classes describing the dangers of drunk driving shows that a reasonable person would have know his behavior was risky. The evidence showed he committed unlawful acts with gross negligence.id: 23814
Evidence supported implied malice murder conviction for drunk driver, with a prior conviction, who went out drinking knowing he would be driving home, and drove 20 miles over the safe speed while negotiating a sharp curve.Evidence supported defendant’s implied malice second degree murder conviction where his blood alcohol was about .22 percent, he had planned to drive home after drinking, he had a prior drunk driving conviction that required he take classes showing the dangers of drunk driving, and he was driving almost 57 miles per hour where the critical speed to negotiate the sharp curve was 32 tp 37 miles per hour.id: 23815
Evidence supported premeditated murder and felony murder where defendant strangled the 67 year-old victim after raping her.The evidence showed defendant knew the 67 year-old victim, entered her home when she was alone to sexually assault her, and at some point began a sustained act of strangling her. There was sufficient evidence to support the jury’s finding that the murder was deliberate and premeditated. The evidence also supported felony murder based on rape where the victim’s thighs were bruised and defendant’s semen was found in her vagina.id: 24058
Evidence of defendant’s influence over the shooter was enough to support his conviction for aiding and abetting the murder. Defendant argued the evidence was insufficient to support his murder conviction that was based on the theory that he aided and abetted the shooter. Defendant argued the evidence did not show he assisted the shooter before or during the killing, only that he drove the shooter away from the scene and was therefore at most an accessory after the fact. However, the evidence of defendant’s influence over the shooter and others was enough to show he aided and abetted the murder.id: 23963
The trial court did not err by failing to instruct sua sponte on involuntary manslaughter as a lesser included offense of malice murder where defendant deliberately assaulted the victim in a way that was dangerous to human life. When the evidence presents a material issue as to whether a killing was committed with malice, the trial court has a sua sponte duty to instruct on involuntary manslaughter as a lesser included offense even when the killing occurs during the commission of an aggravated assault. But where, as here, the defendant has deliberately engaged in aggravated assault the natural consequences of which are dangerous to human life, thus satisfying the objective component of implied malice as a matter of law, and no material issue is presented as to whether the defendant subjectively appreciated the danger to human life his conduct posed, the court had no sua sponte duty to instruct on involuntary manslaughter.id: 24057
Evidence supported the second degree murder convictions of the inmates who beat a child molester to death under the implied malice, aiding and abetting and conspiracy theories. Defendants were prison inmates who were convicted of the murder of another inmate they suspected was a child molester following a brutal beating. Evidence supported the second degree murder under the implied malice theory where the manner of the assault rendered the nature of each defendant’s conduct dangerous to life and the defendants had to know their conduct endangered the victim’s life. Evidence also supported the convictions for aiding and abetting under the natural and probable consequence theory as a reasonable person in their position would have known the violent beating could result in death. Finally, defendants were liable under a conspiracy theory as all of the violent acts against the victims were in furtherance of the conspiracy.id: 23707
Evidence of an attack on vaginal and rectal areas as well as strangulation evidence supported the conviction of murder by torture.Evidence supported the murder by torture conviction where it showed evidence of a prolonged attack that included injuries to the vagina and rectal areas from a spray can and strangulation.id: 23311
Evidence supported the involuntary manslaughter conviction for a transit police officer who shot and killed a passenger in a confrontation where the officer believed he was using his taser gun.Defendant, a BART police officer, was convicted of involuntary manslaughter after shooting a passenger during a confrontation where he thought he was using his taser gun rather than his hand gun. He argued there was insufficient evidence of criminal negligence. However, the jury could reasonably have found defendant’s conduct rose to the level of conscious indifference to the consequences of his acts, and was not a mere mistake. Contrary to defendant’s claim, there is no higher standard for involuntary manslaughter for police officers who kill in the line of duty.id: 22735
Evidence supported second degree murder convictions for parents who failed to seek medical attention for their 17 year-old daughter who had a potentially fatal diabetic condition. Defendants were convicted of implied malice second degree murder of their 17 year-old daughter. Evidence supported the jury’s implied findings that defendants were aware that their failure to obtain medical treatment for the victim’s diabetic condition endangered her life, and that they failed to obtain such treatment in conscious disregard of that risk.id: 22576
Defendant was properly convicted of first degree murder under the provocative act murder doctrine where he was committing a robbery and taunting the victim before one of them shot an accomplice.Defendant was convicted of murder based on the provocative act murder doctrine. He argued the court erred by instructing that the felony-murder rule could be used to determine the degree of murder committed under the provocative act murder doctrine. Contrary to defendant’s claim, he could be convicted of first degree murder under the doctrine even where the murder was committed during a robbery. Moreover, the evidence supported the conviction under the doctrine where defendant’s acts went beyond those necessary to commit the robbery. Far beyond committing a simple robbery, defendant taunted, terrorized and toyed with the victims for an extended period of time before one of them grabbed a gun and shot defendant’s accomplice.id: 22776
Evidence supported the implied malice murder convictions where defendants were involved in a street race that resulted in a fatal collision. Defendants were convicted of implied malice second degree murder as they were involved in a street race where someone in another car was killed. They argued there was insufficient evidence to show they acted with conscious disregard for life because there was no evidence that they knew of the risk involved in their conduct. However, the evidence overwhelmingly showed that defendants were subjectively aware of the risk that their street racing created and they were consciously indifferent to the consequences. One defendant argued he could not be liable for the murder because his car did not strike the victim’s car but the evidence was sufficient where the defendants were jointly engaged in a speed race that led directly to the fatal collision.id: 22310
Evidence supported the first degree premeditated murder conviction where defendant calmly shot the victim who refused sex.Defendant shot the victim after his frustrated sexual encounter in which she refused to have sex with him. His subsequent actions also supported a conclusion that he killed the victim at close range in order to live up to his nickname “Point Blank.” And the manner of the killing was calm and exacting. The evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for first degree premeditated murder.id: 22089
Evidence supported defendant’s attempted murder convictions where he shot into a crowd intending to kill two people who were not present.Defendant fired a gun into a crowd intending to kill two black males. However, the intended victims were not present in the group. Defendant argued he could not be convicted of attempted murder under a theory of attempted murder based on a theory of transferred intent. The prosecution argued the convictions were supported under the “kill zone” theory. Neither argument is correct. Instead, the convictions were supported by substantial evidence that he specifically tried to murder two people by shooting into a group of people where he thought they were. The fact that his targets were not present does not excuse him from liability for attempted murder because factual impossibility is not a defense to a charge of intent.id: 22060
There is no requirement of a prior DUI or an alcohol related accident to establish implied malice. Defendant was convicted of second degree murder under the implied malice theory as she was heavily intoxicated and caused the fatal accident by driving into oncoming traffic. Contrary to her claim, there was no requirement of a predicate act, i.e., a prior DUI or alcohol related accident to prove implied malice. Here, she was heavily intoxicated, warned not to drive, and sped away when the police arrived to provide assistance. The jury could properly conclude that she acted with conscious disregard for life and with wanton disregard of the near certainty that someone would be killed.id: 22246
Evidence supported the murder conviction even though the prosecution failed to eliminate the possibility that someone other than defendant was the shooter.Defendant argued the evidence was insufficient to show the victim’s death was caused by a firearm and it therefore did not support the gun use enhancement or the murder conviction. However, contrary to defendant’s claim, the prosecutor need not eliminate the possibility that someone other than the defendant was the shooter or that the victim’s death was caused by something other than a firearm.id: 22519
Defendant’s act of cocking the rifle she brought to assault Canas was sufficient to support her conviction under the provocative act murder charge.Defendant and her boyfriend attacked Canas, who after being shot, took the gun in the struggle and fatally shot defendant’s boyfriend. She was convicted of attempted murder on a provocative act murder theory of Canas and first degree murder of her boyfriend. She argued the evidence did not support that theory because none of her acts was sufficiently egregious to provoke a deadly response from Canas. However, it was defendant who brought the gun and her idea to attack Canas who had been harassing her brother. The evidence supported the jury’s implied finding that her conduct was sufficient to provoke a lethal response from Canas. id: 21928
Evidence supported torture murder conviction where defendant lit a bookkeeper on fire when she did not pay money he believed he was owed. Substantial evidence supported defendant's conviction of first degree murder theory where it showed that defendant became mad at the bookkeeper of the company he believed was holding his money, expressed his intent to hurt and burn her, and then poured gasoline in her face and body before lighting her on fire. id: 21896
There was sufficient evidence of premeditation and deliberation to support the first degree murders of several prostitutes who were found bound at the wrists and ankles. Defendant was convicted in a capital trial of murdering seven prostitutes. There was sufficient evidence of deliberations and premeditation to support the convictions. First, there was evidence that defendant hated prostitutes and wanted to sexually brutalize and then kill them. Moreover, several of the victims were bound at the wrists and ankles showing an intent to disable them while he planned their deaths. Finally, the number of killings gave rise to the inference that they were preconceived and deliberate.id: 21689
Evidence of defendant’s physical violence against and deliberate starvation of the five year old victim supported his conviction of first degree murder on a torture-murder theory.Defendant argued the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction of first degree murder under a torture-murder theory. He acknowledges burning, shaking, smothering and hitting the boy on the head with a shovel were sufficient to establish torture, but claimed there was insufficient evidence to show his torture was the “but for” cause of the boy’s death. However, there was sufficient evidence to show defendant’s physical violence and deliberate starvation of the boy were concurrent causes and a substantial factor of the boy’s death. id: 21727
Premeditation and deliberation were established for the murder of defendant’s wife and her mother where, feeling betrayed by his wife and mocked by her mother, he went upstairs and retrieved an ornamental knife that he used to kill them.Defendant was convicted of the first degree murder of his wife and mother-in-law. He argued the evidence was insufficient to establish deliberation and premeditation. However, the evidence supported that inference. Defendant, believing his wife to be unfaithful, perceiving himself to have been mocked by his mother-in-law, and afraid that both of them were plotting to kill him, took a beautiful ornamental knife normally kept in an upstairs bedroom and went down the stairs specifically intending to kill both women. id: 21781
Evidence supported the first degree murder conviction where defendant shot and killed the officer who detained him. Defendant argued there was insufficient evidence to support his first degree murder conviction since he randomly fired shots at the officer. However, defendant could have had a motive since discovery of his firearm, after the officer detained him, could have led to his arrest. While there was no evidence of planning as only a few minutes elapsed between the traffic stop and the shooting, premeditation can occur in a short time, and defendant’s interaction with the officer was more than momentary. Finally, the manner of killing supports the first degree murder conviction since defendant fired a shot from the car and then got out and shot at the retreating officer and fired a third shot while standing over his body. id: 21740
Evidence supported defendant’s implied malice murder conviction where he raced through city streets, ran a red light which caused a multi-car accident and a death. Defendant argued the evidence was insufficient to support his second degree murder conviction based on implied malice, because it did not show he was subjectively aware of the risk. However, defendant drove through city streets at excessive speeds. He ran a red light and collided with another car which in turn hit another car. The accident caused death to one victim and serious injury to another. These facts supported the conviction even though defendant was not under the influence, and was not the subject of a pursuit.id: 21774
Evidence supported defendant’s involuntary manslaughter conviction since his act of battery, stuffing a rock in the victim’s mouth and giving him cocaine was a substantial contributing factor in the death. Defendant argued there was insufficient evidence to support the involuntary manslaughter conviction. He claimed that because the prosecution’s medical expert identified four factors that contributed to the victim’s death, and could not identify any factor as more prominent than the others, that there was insufficient evidence of causation. However, when there are multiple concurrent causes of death, the jury need not find the primary cause. It is enough to show that defendant’s conduct was a substantial factor in causing the death. Defendant’s conduct was a substantial factor in the victim’s death where he repeatedly hit the victim, placed a rock in his mouth and gave him cocaine.id: 21777
Evidence supported the assault on a child causing death conviction where defendant intentionally struck his young son several times in a manner that would lead a reasonable person to realize great bodily injury was likely.Defendant was convicted of assault on a child causing death under Penal Code section 273ab. The Court of Appeal reversed the conviction finding insufficient evidence to prove the mens rea for the offense, because it failed to show defendant had actual knowledge that he was wrestling too hard with his son. However, the Court of Appeal misapplied the mens rea standard for section 273ab. And substantial evidence showed defendant knew he was striking his young son with his fist, forearm, knee and elbow, and that he used an amount of force a reasonable person would realize was likely to result in great bodily injury. id: 21559
Evidence that a truck driver knew his brakes were faulty showed actual awareness of the great risk of harm for purposes of implied malice second degree murder.Defendant drove a 25-ton semi-trailer truck carrying a load of vehicles when he sped down a highway, ran a red light and hit a small vehicle killing two occupants. Others were injured as the truck continued through an intersection, stopping only after it crashed into a bookstore. The trial court erred by granting defendant’s motion to dismiss the second degree (implied malice) murder charges. The evidence showed defendant was aware of the truck’s brake problems and did nothing to fix them. The evidence presented to the grand jury supported a rational ground for assuming the possibility that defendant decided to continue driving his truck down the highway with an actual awareness of the great risk of harm his actions created.id: 21505
Evidence supported the murder conviction where the assassin’s shooting of the cop was a foreseeable consequence of the conspiracy to kill another person.Defendant was convicted of the murder of a police officer. He hired Volarvich to kill Shamberger and gave him a gun to do so, but when stopped by the officer, Volarvich while high on methamphetamine shot the victim. Defendant argued the murder conviction had to be reversed since the shooting of the officer was not in furtherance of the conspiracy to kill Shamberger and was unforseen and unforeseeable. However, jurors could reasonably conclude the murder of the officer was a natural and probable consequence of the conspiracy because defendant knew Volarvich was an unstable meth user who would likely kill an officer if stopped to avoid arrest and complete his mission. id: 21272
Evidence supported attempted premeditated murder where defendant fired shots into the victim’s bedroom after threatening to kill him, and assault with a firearm on the victim’s children who were also likely at home at the time of the shooting. After threatening to kill Gomez, defendant fired two shots into his master bedroom window. He knew Gomez was at home, and knew it was highly likely that his two children were home as well. The evidence supported the jury’s conclusion that defendant had the necessary mental states for the crimes of attempted premeditated murder of Gomez and assault with a firearm on the children.id: 20890
Evidence of torture was sufficient to support the murder conviction notwithstanding that the final beatings were separated by time from the previous beatings.Defendant argued that his first degree murder by torture conviction had to be reversed because there was no evidence that his final blow or blows to his stepdaughter were part of a deliberate and premeditated intent to inflict extreme and prolonged pain. However,that defendant's final beatings were separated by time from the previous beatings was entirely inconsequential. The evidence established that defendant perpetrated a deliberate vicious course of conduct against the helpless child over a course of months, intensifying the beatings in the last few weeks of her life. There is no question that defendant's acts were part of his wilful, deliberate and calculated intent to inflict pain on the victim.id: 10035
Evidence supported the murder conviction on an aiding and abetting theory where defendant encouraged his friend to shoot the victim.Evidence was sufficient to show that defendant aided and abetted the premeditated murder of Barajas. Defendant and the victim were members of rival tagging groups. Defendant and others confronted the victim in his front yard following a fight. Defendant encouraged another person to shoot the victim. He then fled the scene and helped dispose of the weapon. The evidence showed he knowingly encouraged the murder, or a firearm assault of which the murder was a natural and probable consequence.id: 20656
Kicking and burning the victim with hot oil supported first degree murder under theories of torture and premeditation.The evidence supported a conviction of murder by torture where the victim was brutally kicked, and after being incapacitated, the perpetrator poured hot cooking oil onto various parts of her body inflicting burns to several areas including her genital region. The methodical infliction of burn wounds also supported first degree murder on a theory of premeditated and deliberate intent to kill.id: 20517
Evidence supported provocative act murder conviction where defendants relentlessly chased and assaulted the person who responded with lethal force against an accomplice.Defendants and two accomplices attacked, beat and stabbed the victim. The victim also drew a knife and stabbed and killed one of the accomplices. Evidence supported the defendants' conviction of first degree murder of the deceased accomplice under the provocative act theory. The jury could have found that by relentlessly pursuing and attacking the victim defendants knew there was a high probability of a lethal response.id: 20215
Evidence that defendants left their car with a gun for the purpose of engaging in a fist fight supported the finding that the murder was a natural and probable consequence of the assault.Defendant argued the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction for aiding and abetting the murder of Llamas on the natural and probable consequences theory, because there was no evidence that he knew Jimenez was armed or intended to use a firearm in a fistfight. However, the undisputed evidence shows three defendants stopped and exited their car to engage in a fight with the victim. There was substantial evidence that Jimenez was armed with a gun as he ran to the scene, that the men grappled for the gun, and that defendant yelled "shoot him." The standard instructions were facilitated by the jury's determination that, under these circumstances, defendant's murder was a natural and probable consequence of the assault.id: 14837
Defendant who kills a pregnant woman may be liable for second degree implied malice murder of the fetus.A defendant shoots a woman, killing her. As a result, her fetus dies also. The defendant may be held liable for the second degree implied malice murder of the fetus, without evidence that he knew the woman was pregnant.id: 17811
Evidence that appellant furnished victim with paraphernalia to facilitate heroin injection supported involuntary manslaughter on an aiding and abetting theory.Evidence established that appellant was aware of victim's criminal purpose when he asked for a spoon. The evidence of appellant's act of giving victim the spoon and allowing him to use her bathroom to inject drugs, with the evidence of the flat rubber strap and other drug paraphernalia found by the police at appellant's house, supported the finding that appellant facilitated the commission of victim's use of heroin and that he intended to do so.id: 10291
Defendant's convictions were supported by evidence of motive, opportunity, false alibi and accomplice testimony.Substantial evidence supported defendant's convictions
for murder and conspiracy to commit murder. Defendant had motive and opportunity, and had no plausible explanation for the false alibi he gave police after the killing. Moreover, the
accomplices who implicated him presented a coherent account of the details, and the jury was informed they were testifying in exchange for a grant of immunity.id: 19305
Evidence supported the felony-murder special circumstance where it showed defendant was a major participant in the felony acting with reckless indifference to life.Evidence supported the true finding in the felony-murder special circumstance. Even though there was no substantial evidence suggesting that defendant was the actual killer or had the intent to kill, the evidence did show that he was a "major participant" in the attempted robbery and that he acted with "reckless indifference to human life."id: 18880
Evidence supported two attempted murder convictions where defendant fired a single shot into a slowly moving car narrowly missing a mother and her baby.Defendant was convicted of two counts of attempted murder where he fired a single shot into a slowly moving vehicle, narrowly missing a mother and her infant son. He argued the conviction for attempted murder of the baby must be reversed for lack of evidence of an intent to kill the child. However, because the mother and the child were in defendant's line of fire, and the single shot could have killed either, the jury could infer he intended to kill both.id: 18872
Evidence of multiple stab wounds that were not potentially fatal supported the torture murder conviction and torture special circumstance.The victim suffered 81 pre-mortem stab and slash wounds, only three of which were potentially fatal. Some, including the splitting of her eyelids, suggested a meticulous, controlled approach. Moreover, the evidence showed defendant may have tortured the victim to coerce her to reveal the combination to a safe. Contrary to defendant's claim, the question of how long the victim actually suffered is beside the point as long as the defendant intended to inflict prolonged pain. The evidence was sufficient to support murder by torture, and the torture special circumstance.id: 18835
Evidence that the victim was found stabbed near the floor safe with her purse emptied out supported the felony murder conviction and attempted robbery-murder special circumstance.The victim was found, stabbed repeatedly, next to floor space hidden in the back room of a bar. The contents of her purse were strewn about the floor. The attack occurred after the bar was closed. The jury could have concluded defendant forced the victim at knifepoint to the back room, to rob her of the night's receipts, and then inflicted the fatal wounds as part of the attempted robbery. The evidence supported the felony murder conviction and attempted robbery-murder special circumstance.id: 18836
That defendant stabbed the victim in places other than the heart or lungs did not show lack of an intent to kill for purposes of attempted murder.Defendant argued the evidence did not support a finding that he acted with intent to kill for purposes of attempted murder because there was no injury to the victim's heart or lungs. However, defendant stabbed the victim over a dozen times. The fact that he missed the heart or lungs was fortuitous and not indicative of the absence of an intent to kill.id: 18389
Implied malice was established for the factual basis for the plea where defendant knew the danger of drunk driving but chose to do so anyway.Defendant pled guilty to second degree murder of a fetus following a drunk driving accident. Defense counsel adopted the facts set forth in the preliminary hearing transcript for purposes of the factual basis. Defendant argued that while the transcript showed drunk driving caused the accident, and an unborn fetus died as a result, it failed to show implied or express malice. However, implied malice was established by defendant's history of drunk driving and his choice to do so in the present case.id: 18219
Evidence supported the five attempted murder convictions where defendant fired two shots at a group of five people.Evidence showed defendant fired two shots in the direction of five rival gang members. He claimed that because two shots could not have killed five people, the evidence was insufficient to show he attempted to kill all five people. However, the firing of only two shots was not dispositive and there was sufficient evidence that defendant committed other acts in furtherance of attempting to murder the five individuals.id: 18080
Evidence supported conviction of murder after defendant punched his pregnant girlfriend forcing the delivery of a child that died from another condition.Defendant punched his pregnant girlfriend several times. The doctor performed an immediate Caesarean section and the baby later died. Defendant argued he could not be convicted of murder because the fatal act occurred before birth. However, the law looks to the victim's status at the time of death rather than at the time of the act. Because Marcel was a human being when he died, the murder conviction was proper. Moreover, evidence supported the conviction despite Marcel's debilitating birth condition because it was the premature delivery following the beating that rendered him vulnerable to the condition that killed him.id: 17942
Evidence supported the attempted premeditated murder conviction where defendant ordered two people to the floor at gunpoint, and executed one, before the other escaped with his gun.Evidence supported the attempted murder conviction. The bartender's killing provided a model for the attempt to kill the bar patron. The patron, unlike the bartender, refused to lie on the floor and avoided defendant's choke hold. Defendant then pursued the patron out to the sidewalk which supported the finding that he intended to kill her. Moreover, evidence supported the finding that the attempted killing was premeditated and deliberate as the murder of the bartender showed defendant's intent to kill the patron from the time he pointed the revolver at her and ordered her to the floor, until she managed to escape and leave the bar with the gun.id: 17862
The evidence supported a conviction of attempted murder of the baby where the baby, in a carseat, was in the direct line of fire of the intended victim.Defendant, aware that an infant was riding in a carseat behind the driver, fired a shot from behind the car which lodged in the driver's door. Defendant argued the evidence was insufficient to support a conviction of attempted murder of the baby. However, the jury could reasonably conclude that in shooting at the driver, and the baby who was in the line of fire, defendant knew of the small chance of hitting the driver without hitting the baby, and therefore defendant concurrently intended to kill the baby and the driver.id: 17733
Evidence supported finding of premeditation and deliberation where defendant pointed his gun at the head of a rival gang member before opening fire on the others.Evidence that the defendant and victim were in rival gangs helped show the motive for the shooting. The motive, coupled with defendant's deliberate conduct in first aiming the gun at Gomez's head and then firing it at the others victims as they fled from the car, supported the findings that the murder and attempted murders were committed with premeditation and deliberation.id: 17626
Evidence supported a verdict of deliberate and premeditated murder where the defendant armed himself, followed the victim, fired a shot at a vital area of the body at close range and prevented a witness from calling an ambulance.Defendant argued there was insufficient evidence to support a verdict of premeditated and deliberate first degree murder. However, there was evidence of planning (defendant's arming himself and following the victim to the office), motive (to effectuate a robbery), and a manner of killing indicative of a deliberate intent to kill (firing a shot at a vital area of the body at close range, then preventing a witness from calling an ambulance). The evidence supported the premeditated murder conviction.id: 16791
Defendant's testimony that he wanted to stab someone and acted on this intent by lunging at the victim and stabbing her in the abdomen supported the attempted willful, deliberate and premeditated murder conviction.Defendant testified he intended to stab someone that day, and acted on this intent by lunging at the victim and stabbing her in the abdomen. Defendant had earlier told police the same story and that the victim just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. These facts supported defendant's conviction of attempted willful, deliberate and premeditated murder.id: 16731
Stabbing the victim in the abdomen was sufficient to demonstrate an intent to kill.Defendant argued there was insufficient evidence of an intent to kill. He testified that he intended to stab but not to kill the victim. However, he did not stab the victim in the arm or leg, but rather the abdomen, which is an extremely vulnerable area of the body.id: 16732
Evidence supported first degree attempted murder conviction where defendant saw a rival gang member, flashed his gang sign and opened fire on the victim's truck.Evidence supported the attempted first degree murder conviction. It was clear that defendant thought before he acted where he saw the victim, threw his gang sign and opened fire on the victim's truck. Motive was established where the evidence showed the defendant and victim were members of rival gangs who had an ongoing violent feud. The manner of the attempted killing also indicated an intent to kill where defendant fired at least six shots from a distance of about 20 feet. Contrary to defendant's claim, the evidence did not show the victim provoked defendant.id: 16525
Evidence supported provocative act murder where defendant pistol-whipped the robbery victim who in turn shot defendant's confederate.Defendant argued the evidence was insufficient to prove murder under the provocative act murder doctrine. The evidence showed that he pistol-whipped the robbery victim. A provocative act is something beyond that which is necessary to commit a robbery. The record supports the conclusion that the fear that prompted the robbery victim's killing of defendant's confederate arose as a result of defendant's pistol-whipping.id: 16483
Evidence supported aiding and abetting conviction where defendant, a non-gang member fired shots at his friends' rival gang in retaliation for earlier assault.At a bench trial, defendant was convicted of aiding and abetting a first degree murder and attempted premeditated murder. He argued there was insufficient evidence that he knew the shooter intended to commit a drive-by shooting. While defendant may not have been a full member of the gang, he was friends with its members. He was also aware of the hostility with the rival gang. The rival gang provoked defendant's friends by throwing bottles and defendant's friends decided to retaliate. There were guns in the car, and when the primary shooter fired at the rivals, defendant joined in and fired every bullet in his clip. The evidence strongly supported the court's conclusion that defendant knew there was going to be a murderous shooting.id: 15444
Shooting incapacitated victim twice in the chest at close range supported finding of premeditation and deliberation.Defendant argued there was insufficient evidence to support a finding he premeditated and deliberated the killing. However, his calm and cool firing of his gun twice at close range into the chest of an incapacitated victim supported the finding defendant made a cold, calculated decision to kill the victim - that he acted with premeditation and deliberation.id: 15445
There was sufficient evidence of implied malice where defendant was manufacturing methamphetamine in her home when an explosion killed her children.Defendant was manufacturing methamphetamine in her mobile home. One of the volatile chemicals she was using caught fire and caused an explosion killing three of her children. She was aware that the chemicals used were dangerous. There was sufficient evidence that defendant performed an act, the natural consequences of which were dangerous to life, with the knowledge that her act endangered the life of others, and with conscious disregard for human life, to support the jury's finding that she acted with implied malice.id: 15447
There was sufficient evidence of supported premeditation and deliberation where the nonviolent victim owed defendant money, and was shot at close range without any argument or struggle.Evidence of premeditation and deliberation was sufficient to support defendant's conviction of first degree murder. He killed the victim after repeated efforts to collect a debt. There was no history of threats or violence by the victim. The victim was unarmed when he went to speak with defendant and there was no argument. Defendant pulled out a gun and shot the victim at close range while the victim's hands were at his side.id: 15448
A reasonable person would know that rapid violent shaking of a child or repeated blows to the head would produce great bodily injury.Defendant was convicted of assaulting a child by means likely to cause great bodily injury resulting in death. (Penal Code section 273ab.) He argued there was no evidence presented at trial to establish a reasonable person would be likely to know "shaking or hitting a child with rapid, moderate force" would produce great bodily injury. However, the severity of the victim's injuries belied defendant's claim where the injuries were either caused by rapid, violent shaking or by rapid, repeated blows with one or two "tremendous" ones leaving at least 24 bruises on the back of his head.id: 15319
Drive-by shooting of an occupied residence manifests an intent to kill for purposes of section 188's express malice requirement and evidence supported the attempted murder convictions.The convictions arose from drive-by shootings at two residences by one gang in retaliation for prior gang activity of a rival gang. Evidence supported the eight attempted murder convictions. Penal Code section 188's express malice requirement was met even though defendants could not see all their victims during the shooting rampage. Spraying an occupied residence with bullets from high powered assault rifles manifests a deliberate intention to unlawfully take the lives of its inhabitants.id: 14861
Evidence supported the finding of implied malice where the victim who was afraid of the water was found dead in the deep end of the pool with blunt force injuries.The record contains sufficient evidence that defendant acted with implied malice by forcing the victim, a non-swimmer, into the deep end of his swimming pool either before or after beating her. Witnesses testified that she was afraid of the water, that she had blunt force injuries which were not the product of rescue efforts, and that the injuries were inflicted within four hours of her death. The inferences drawn by the jury were rational.id: 14862
Evidence supported second degree murder convictions for drunk driver with a high blood alcohol content with four drunk driving priors who was driving recklessly.Defendant drunk driver argued the evidence was insufficient to support convictions of two counts of second degree murder. He drove with a blood alcohol level of .22 percent. He was speeding, swerving out of control and had three near misses. Moreover, he had four prior drunk driving convictions. The jury could reasonably infer that the convictions alone, even without the educational programs, impressed upon defendant the dangers of drunk driving. Substantial evidence supported the verdict.id: 10284
Evidence supported the finding of implied malice where appellant drove while under the influence of PCP and knew that such driving was dangerous to life.While driving under the influence of PCP, appellant collided with another vehicle killing its two occupants. He was convicted of second degree murder based on a finding of implied malice. There was substantial evidence that he drove knowing he was under the influence of PCP including his testimony that he felt the effects of PCP immediately after smoking the cigarette. There can be no doubt that he knew from two similar previous accidents that driving under the influence of PCP is dangerous to life, Finally, appellant's erratic driving pattern prior to the accident showed that he was aware of the risk.id: 10285
Evidence supported the finding of premeditation despite the absence of time to contemplate the murder.While there was no evidence that defendant contemplated the possibility of murder prior to his encounter with the police officer, the fact that defendant followed the retreating officer to the police car and exerted himself in order to obtain the shotgun at a time when the officer was merely using the radio, and then did use the gun against the officer, suggested that defendant, in that period of time contemplated killing the officer.id: 10286
Evidence supported the finding of premeditation and deliberation where defendant pointed a gun at the victim and shot him in the back as the victim fled.Evidence was sufficient to establish premeditation and deliberation prior to committing the attempted murder. The jury could have found defendant's calculated conduct of pointing a loaded gun at his victim's face as he demanded money and gold, and then shooting the noncomplying victim in the back as he fled, established that before he commenced the robbery he prepared himself to kill if necessary, and upon rapid reflection he decided to kill once the confrontation unfolded contrary to his wishes.id: 10287
Evidence supported the robbery and murder convictions where defendant had been with the victim on the night of the murder, was arrested in victim's car and denied having been in victim's house where the evidence was to the contrary.Defendant was seen talking with the victim and looking at his car on the night he was killed, about one hour before the victim's ex-wife was unable to contact him by telephone. The victim was brutally murdered and robbed. Defendant's palm print was found in the bathroom of the victim's house near the toilet paper that was used to gag the victim. Defendant was arrested in the victim's car, offered a forged bill of sale, denied ever having been in the victim's house and gave a false name to the officers. He was also found wearing the victim's gold charm at the time of the preliminary hearing. The evidence was sufficient to support the robbery and murder convictions as well as the special circumstance.id: 10288
Evidence supported torture murder conviction where among other things the victim was subjected to two different methods of strangulation.The victim was subjected to strangulation by two different methods, her wrists were bound so tightly as to cut into her skin, she was beaten in the face severely enough to have caused her eyes to be swollen shut and her lips to be swollen, she received severe blows to other parts of her body, and she suffered repeated, incision-type stab wounds to her neck, chest, and breast area. This evidence amply supported the finding that the victim's death was brought about by torture.id: 10289
Evidence that a Crip shot a Blood from a car at close range after the death of a Crip supported the second degree murder conviction.Evidence established that Five-Nine East Coast Crips and Bloodstone villains were rival gangs and had a violent relationship, and retaliated against rival gangs for deaths of gang members. Defendant Crip intentionally fired a gun at the Blood from close range at the same location as a Crip member had been killed some months earlier. Evidence supported the second degree murder conviction.id: 10290
Evidence that defendant received criticism about his work performance three days before the crimes was insufficient as a matter of law to support a finding of heat of passion.Defendant argued that manslaughter instructions were warranted because there was sufficient evidence from which the jury could conclude that the killings, even if intentional, occurred upon a sudden quarrel or heat of passion in the absence of either malice or an underlying felony. However, to the extent defendant relied solely on criticism he received about his work performance three days before the crimes, such evidence was insufficient as a matter of law to arouse feelings of homicidal rage or passion in an ordinarily reasonable person.id: 10292
Evidence that defendant tracked the victim to a location and opened fire on his vehicle supported the finding of premeditation and deliberation.Evidence supported the jury's finding of premeditation and deliberation. The fully armed killer in the cold blooded street gang murder tracked the victim to the location of the assault and without warning opened fire into his vehicle.id: 10293
Evidence that the Blood's killed appellant's Crip friend and that he drove by them and stared for 10 to 20 seconds before shooting established an intent to kill for purposes of attempted murder.Evidence established that the Crips and the Bloods hated each other and had a violent relationship. Appellant Crip member's car approached the Blood's vehicle, stopped for 10 to 20 seconds before firing. Evidence further showed that Bloods had killed his Crip friend a year and a half earlier, that appellant kept an enlarged photo of the funeral in his bedroom and a letter from his deceased friend stating that they were Blood killers. Evidence of intent to kill was sufficient to support a guilty verdict of attempting murder.id: 10294
High blood alcohol of appellant who was driving alone supported an inference that he intended to drive for purposes of implied malice.Driving under the influence of alcohol, appellant struck a car and killed its driver. He was convicted of second degree murder. He argued the evidence of implied malice was insufficient because there was no evidence appellant knew at the time he made the decision to drink that he was going to be driving. However, appellant's blood alcohol level (.32%) indicated prolonged drinking. Since he was driving alone at 4:00 a.m., it was a reasonable inference that when he left wherever he had been drinking, his car was available and he intended to drive. it.id: 10295
Intent to kill two different victims can be inferred from evidence that the defendant fired a single shot at two victims, both of whom were visible to defendant.Where a defendant fired at two officers, one of whom was crouched in front of the other, the defendant endangered the lives of both officers and a reasonable jury could infer from this that the defendant intended to kill both. The evidence supported the two attempted murder convictions.id: 10296
Lack of evidence of motive does not preclude a finding of premeditation.Evidence established the killing was carefully planned as defendant stalked the girls to a remote spot where he could kill them and escape. Moreover, the manner of killing was exact <197> a single bullet between the eyes by an expert marksman. Defendant argued the evidence did not support a finding of premeditation because there was no evidence of motive. However, a senseless, random, but premeditated, killing supports a verdict of first degree murder.id: 10297
Premeditation was established where defendant used a pipe as a weapon, took it with him on the nights in question and used it to kill unarmed victims.Evidence would allow the jury to conclude the defendant kept a pipe in his car for use as a weapon, and that on four separate occasions he met men in gay bars, invited them to his car for marijuana or sex, drove them to nearby side streets and without warning struck them on the head with the pipe. Such evidence reasonably suggested defendant considered the possibility of murder in advance. The lack of provocation by the victims similarly leads to the inference that the attacks were the result of a deliberate plan. Finally, the conclusion that he committed similar crimes on a number of separate occasions strongly indicated planning activity.id: 10299
Second degree murder was not improper for a defendant who drove down the wrong side of the highway while intoxicated.Appellant was convicted of four counts of second degree murder after killing four people while driving drunk in the wrong direction on a highway. He argued that the evidence did not support the murder convictions because no person would knowingly and intentionally drive the wrong way on the freeway and therefore he must have been unaware of the risk. However, the driving occurred at night and he must have seen lights coming toward him. Moreover, his pattern of driving supported an inference that he knew he was going the wrong way as he was driving west in the west-bound lane made a U-turn and drove east in the emergency lane.id: 10300
The act of brandishing a firearm may constitute an act sufficiently dangerous to life to support a conviction of second degree murder on an implied malice theory.Because the trial court's instructions permitted the jury to base a finding of malice on defendant's intentional brandishing of a firearm, the Court of Appeal reversed defendant's second degree murder conviction. The court found that intentionally brandishing a handgun, as a matter of law, could not support such a finding. The Court of Appeal erred in reversing the conviction. Although a jury may determine, under certain circumstances, that a defendant's brandishing of a firearm did not pose a sufficient danger to human life to establish that the defendant acted with malice in other circumstances, the act of brandishing a firearm may be sufficiently dangerous to human life to support a finding of malice.id: 10301
The act of firing a rifle toward the victim at a range and in a manner that could have inflicted a mortal wound was sufficient to support an inference of intent to kill.Defendant argued the evidence was insufficient to establish that he possessed the specific intent to kill necessary for an attempted murder conviction. He argued that had he truly intended to kill the victim, he would have fired more than one shot or taken some other action to insure the accuracy of his aim. However, defendant's conduct prior to the shooting, which included a threat to do bodily harm, combined with the testimony that he took aim before firing, and the seriousness of the victim's injuries constituted substantial evidence on the issue of intent.id: 10302
Voluntary ingestion of PCP supported the court's finding of implied malice.Appellant, while under the influence of PCP and alcohol, rear ended a car killing four people. He argued the evidence was insufficient to support the court's finding of implied malice. He essentially argued that previous PCP use had never produced bizarre effects and that the evidence here established that he was so intoxicated as to be unconscious of his surroundings or his conduct. However, evidence supported the court's finding that he deliberately ingested drugs, thereby inducing his mental state, with complete disregard for the safety of others. This state of mind supported the court's finding of implied malice.id: 10303
A drunk driving conviction without evidence of participation in a drinking driver program is admissible on the issue of subjective awareness of the risks of drunk driving.Defendant killed someone in a drunk driving collision and was convicted of second degree murder. He argued the court erred in permitting the introduction of evidence that he had been convicted of drunk driving four times between 1973 and 1984. He claimed the evidence was not relevant to prove his subjective knowledge of the risks of life from drunk driving but was highly prejudicial on the critical issue of mental state differentiating implied malice from gross negligence. He argued such evidence should not have been admitted without a showing that he attended a program where such risks were explained. However, the record established that he completed probation, i.e., that he enrolled in and completed the SB 38" program. Moreover, while conviction coupled with participation in a drunk driving program may be more probative on the issue of subjective awareness of risks, a conviction alone is also probative on that issue and admissible.id: 10265
An accidental homicide which does not involve a high speed chase or drug impaired driving can be classified as murder.Defendant was convicted of second degree murder for causing a fatal accident while driving recklessly. Contrary to defendant's claim he was properly charged with murder even though he was sober and was not involved in a high speed chase with police at the time of the fatal collisions. Moreover, evidence supported the finding that he had the requisite subjective knowledge that his conduct created a substantial risk of death to another. Based on his driving record, his prior accident, and the known inadequacy of his brakes on the date in question a serious accident seemed imminent.id: 10267
Defendant's post-arrest statements provided substantial insight into his thought process to support the finding of premeditation and deliberation.There was sufficient evidence of premeditation and deliberation to support the conviction of first degree murder of the officer. Another officer testified that after the killing defendant said he had to do it and that when the victim-officer came after him all I could think about was getting his gun and shooting him so he wouldn't arrest me. The jury could infer defendant's action in leading the officer behind the service station was calculated to permit defendant to carry out his plan out of the view of witnesses.id: 10268
Drive-by shooting by a Crip of a person wearing red shows premeditation and deliberation.Defendant, an avowed gang member (Crip) was convicted of first degree murder. He argued the evidence was insufficient to establish premeditation and deliberation because Crips and Bloods hate each other so much that a Blood dressed in red is intended to provoke a Crip and the shooting is a knee-jerk reaction, just the opposite of a premeditated and deliberated shooting. However, evidence supported the conviction. A studied hatred and enmity, including a pre-planned, purposeful resolve to shoot anyone in a certain neighborhood wearing a certain color, evidences the most cold-blooded, calculated, culpable, kind of premeditation and deliberation.id: 10269
Evidence established premeditation and deliberation where defendant obtained a steak knife to kill a person who could identify him in another crime and searched for another knife after the first one broke.Defendant's obtaining of the steak knife from the kitchen was indicative of planning activity. A plausible motive was evident from the fact that the victim was acquainted with defendant. After he initially surprised and attacked the victim, he decided it was necessary to silence her to prevent her from identifying him. Finally, the manner of killing was indicative of premeditation. Defendant went searching for another knife after the first knife broke. Even if the initial knifing was spontaneous, defendant had time to reflect upon his actions when the knife broke and his search for another knife was indicative of a reasoned decision to kill. The evidence established premeditation and deliberation for purposes of first degree murder.id: 10270
Evidence of appellant's failure to seek medical aid for victim following drug overdose supported involuntary manslaughter on a criminal negligence theory.Evidence established that appellant knew that victim wanted a spoon to administer drugs, then injected himself with drugs and subsequently collapsed on the floor unconscious. There was also evidence that appellant believed victim had collapsed because he had hot shotted, from which the jury could infer that she believed he had injected a dangerous if not fatal dose. Such evidence constitutes substantial evidence that appellant either knew or should have known victim's condition was critical, that immediate medical attention was necessary, and that failure to summon aid tended to endanger victim's life. Evidence therefore supported the trial court's determination that appellant owed a duty to seek medical attention for victim and that there was substantial evidence of criminal negligence.id: 10271
Evidence of retaliatory drive-by-shooting was sufficient to establish first degree murder.Evidence showed that defendants planned to do a drive-by retaliatory shooting at a rival gang in a specific location and participated in the carrying out of that plan which involved the obtaining and loading of two shotguns, the locating of rival gang members, the maneuvering of the vehicle in close proximity to those members, and the firing of the shotguns at those members. The evidence was sufficient to establish express malice,, premeditation and deliberation.id: 10272
Evidence of voluntary intoxication is admissible in determining whether defendant harbored malice, whether such malice was express or implied.Under Penal Code section 22, evidence of voluntary intoxication is admissible in a prosecution for second degree murder where the prosecution seeks to establish the existence of malice aforethought on an implied malice theory, i.e., seeks to prove that the defendant acted with knowledge of the danger to human life and in conscious disregard of human life. The evidence is admissible with regard to the question of whether defendant harbored malice aforethought, whether such malice is express or implied. The trial court in the instant case correctly instructed the jury as to the proper use of evidence of voluntary intoxication in determining whether defendant was guilty of second degree murder or gross vehicular manslaughter and did not err in refusing an additional defense instruction concerning whether defendant was unconscious at the time of killing.id: 10273
Evidence supported finding of premeditation notwithstanding defendant's claimed schizoid condition.Defendant argued that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the jury's findings that the murders were premeditated. He claimed the undisputed evidence established that he was mentally disturbed and suffering from a schizoid condition which prevented him from fully appreciating the wrongfulness of his actions. However, the holdings that first degree murder requires proof of a defendant's meaningful and mature reflection on the gravity of his actions, were abrogated by an amendment to Penal Code section 189 shortly before the commission of the offenses in the instant case.id: 10274
Evidence supported first degree murder by torture where the nature of the wounds established that defendant intended to inflict cruel pain and suffering.Appellant argued the evidence was insufficient to establish first degree murder by torture because the only evidence of intent to torture was the condition of the victim's body, and as a matter of law, intent to torture cannot be inferred solely from the condition of the victim's body. However, appellant's argument was incorrect. The nature of the wounds, which themselves indicated that they were inflicted over a period of time, supported the inference that appellant intended to inflict cruel pain and suffering.id: 10275
Evidence supported first degree murder by lying in wait where defendant waited in his truck for hours then approached the house and asked to talk to the victim in the front yard and shot her after several minutes of conversation.The Court of Appeal reversed the first degree murder conviction finding the evidence was insufficient to support the theory of lying in wait. The court found there was no evidence of watching and waiting, a plan or concealed purpose to take the victim unaware or that defendant attacked the victim from a position of advantage. This was a possible interpretation of the evidence since the defendant knocked on the door and asked to see the victim (his former girlfriend), walked into the front yard with her and after several minutes of conversation pulled out a gun and shot her. However, notwithstanding this interpretation there was also evidence of lying in wait. There was evidence of watching and waiting as defendant's car was parked in front of the house hours before he came to the door. Moreover, the victim's screams in the front yard indicate she was taken by surprise as opposed to a sudden outburst of provoked passion. Finally, the jury could reasonably find defendant sought to obtain a position of advantage by taking her to the front yard away form the house where the others were gathered. Evidence therefore supported the instructions on lying-in-wait murder.id: 10276
Evidence supported first degree murder conviction where after victim's car struck a pole causing her injuries defendant chased her down and strangled her.The evidence showed the victim, gravely injured after her car struck a pole, fled from defendant. He pursued her and then strangled her over a period of up to five minutes, at a time when she was severely debilitated and in pain from internal injuries. Defendant's manner of killing the victim demonstrated a deliberate plan to kill her and supported a conviction of first degree murder.id: 10277
Evidence supported first degree murder conviction where the shooting was gang oriented and defendant admitted he obtained a gun in order to shoot someone.Evidence supported a finding of premeditation and deliberation for purposes of first degree murder. Defendant admitted that he and his co-perpetrator obtained a gun in order to shoot someone. The manner of the killing was indicative of premeditation and deliberation given that the victim was shot 5 or 6 times at close range (about 5 feet). Finally there was evidence of motive as the rival gangs involved were enemies and there was an inference that the shooting was in retaliation for a shooting at a party.id: 10278
Evidence supported first degree felony murder where defendant killed another motorist as a result of a collision while defendant was fleeing from police following a robbery.After robbing a victim of his wallet and new car, defendant drove the stolen car at high speeds in flight from a pursuing police vehicle. He ran four red lights, then collided with two vehicles, killing one of the motorists. Defendant argued the evidence did not support the first degree felony murder conviction as the evidence was insufficient to show he had not reached a place of temporary safety. However, the robbery was reported to the police immediately. Defendant was spotted within four blocks driving the stolen vehicle. The high speed chase began only two minutes after the 911 call. Aside from the close proximity in time and distance between the robbery and pursuit it was significant that he was driving the stolen car and the jury could conclude he was not safe driving the vehicle on public streets.id: 10279
Evidence supported implied malice finding as a doctor was subjectively aware that his methods of home and office deliveries were life-endangering and he consciously disregarded those risks.Defendant, a licensed doctor who practiced obstetrics, was convicted of nine counts of second degree murder following fatal deliveries. There was sufficient evidence from which the jury could infer that defendant was subjectively aware his methods of home and office deliveries were life-endangering, but consciously and deliberately disregarded the risks. The evidence included a mishap at his first hospital which prevented him from becoming chief resident, a patient's death at another hospital coupled with the department head's comments regarding defendant's cavalier attitude, his misrepresentation of board eligibility and probationary status on later applications; the revocation of his privileges at various hospitals; his use of high risk procedures during deliveries resulting in deaths with which he was not charged; and the admonishments by other doctors regarding his dangerous practices in out-of-hospital deliveries.id: 10280
Evidence supported implied malice finding where appellant kept a homemade bomb in his garage, threatened to blow someone up and knew police found and attempted to dismantle it.Appellant made a linked slave and master bomb whose only purpose was to kill people. He stored the bomb in his garage which was in a residential neighborhood. He threatened to blow up an acquaintance. He knew the officers were going to search his garage and later knew that they had found and moved the bomb. While attempting to dismantle the bomb, it exploded killing two people. The evidence supported the jury's finding of implied malice.id: 10281
Evidence supported involuntary manslaughter charge against ranch corporation and its president where a horse escaped from the ranch and collided with a car killing the passenger.A ranch corporation and its president were charged with one count of involuntary manslaughter after a horse escaped from the ranch and collided with a car on the highway killing a passenger. Defendants argued the preliminary hearing evidence regarding the condition of the fence surrounding the ranch was insufficient to establish probable cause. However, the deteriorating condition of the fence coupled with a history of escaping hoses and the proximity of the highway was sufficient to establish probable cause that criminal negligence occurred. Moreover, given the president's personal knowledge of the condition of the fence and the escaping horses there was probable cause to suspect him of the criminal negligence necessary for the charge of involuntary manslaughter.id: 10282
Evidence supported murder based on provocative act theory where defendant pointed a gun at the victim's head and threatened to shoot her if her friend did not come out of the house.Evidence was sufficient to meet the requirements of the provocative act theory. The law requires the life-threatening act on which liability is premised to be a proximate cause of death apart from and beyond the underlying felony. The jury could properly find this life-threatening act when defendant pointed the gun at the victim's head and threatened to shoot her if her friend did not come out of the house. By doing this defendant dramatically increased the risk of severe injuries and even death for his chosen target by the manner of restraining and the proximity of the weapon to her head.id: 10283
About Pat Ford
Pat Ford is a criminal defense lawyer in San Diego who works on appeals in some of the most difficult cases around the state. He has a great record for success and integrity. Pat has also published a criminal case law digest since 1984 that's used by judges and lawyers around the state. He also speaks and writes articles for criminal lawyers as well as consumers interested in the law. The consumer-related articles are intended to be informative but do not constitute legal advice.
Case of the Day
The case of the day summarizes a current case and is viewed by lawyers and judges around the state every day.
Exclusion of 18-25 year-olds from the youthful offender provisions of section 3051 did not violate equal protection. Penal Code section 3051 establishes a parole eligibility hearing for juveniles convicted of special circumstance murder and sentenced to life without the possibility of parole. Excluding persons 18-25 from the youthful offender parole hearing provision did not violate equal protection principles.id: 27245