 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
People v. Barton12/18/1995
EF-->)
IV
Having reaffirmed the soundness of our holding in Sedeno, supra, 10 Cal. 3d 703, we now determine its applicability here.
Over defendant's objection, the trial court instructed the jury on voluntary manslaughter as a lesser offense included within the charged crime of murder, explaining that if the jury found the existence of one of two circumstances -- the killing took place in a sudden quarrel or heat of passion, or defendant acted in the unreasonable but good faith belief that he had to defend himself -- it should find that the malice element of murder was not present, and that therefore defendant was guilty not of murder but only of manslaughter. Under the rationale of Sedeno, supra, 10 Cal. 3d at pages 715-716, this instruction was proper notwithstanding defendant's objection that it was inconsistent with his theory of the case, so long as the record contained substantial evidence from which a jury could reasonably conclude that defendant was not guilty of murder but only of voluntary manslaughter.
Defendant contends that the record contains no evidence that the killing occurred during a sudden quarrel or heat of passion. Heat of passion arises when "at the time of the killing, the reason of the accused was obscured or disturbed by passion to such an extent as would cause the ordinarily reasonable person of average Disposition to act rashly and without deliberation and reflection, and from such passion rather than from judgment." (CALJIC No. 8.42 (5th ed. 1988); see Wickersham, supra, 32 Cal. 3d at p. 326.)
The record contains substantial evidence, some of it offered by the prosecution and some by the defense, from which the jury could reasonably find that defendant intentionally killed Sanchez in a sudden quarrel or heat of passion. Defendant testified that shortly before the killing of Sanchez, his daughter Andrea had come to him, extremely upset, and told him that a man (later identified as victim Sanchez) had threatened her with serious injury by trying to run her car off the road, and that he had spat on the window of her car. When defendant and his daughter confronted Sanchez about his conduct, Sanchez called defendant's daughter a "bitch" and he acted as if he was "berserk." Defendant and Sanchez angrily confronted each other and Sanchez assumed a "fighting stance," challenging defendant. After defendant asked his daughter to call the police, Sanchez started to get into his car; when defendant asked Sanchez where he was going, Sanchez replied, "none of your fucking business," and taunted defendant by saying, "Do you think you can keep me here?" Screaming and swearing, defendant, before firing, ordered Sanchez to "drop the knife" and to get out of his car, threatening to shoot if Sanchez did not do so. This testimony provided substantial evidence from which a reasonable jury could conclude that when defendant killed Sanchez, defendant's reason was obscured by passion to such an extent as would cause an ordinarily reasonable person to act rashly and without reflection, and that defendant thus shot Sanchez in a sudden quarrel or heat of passion.
We also reject defendant's contention that the record contains no evidence from which a reasonable jury could conclude that he killed Sanchez in the unreasonable but good faith belief in having to defend himself. Defendant testified that just before the shooting, Sanchez swung at defendant with what appeared to be a knife; that Sanchez ignored defendant's demand to drop the knife; and that Sanchez then made a sudden movement toward defendant, forcing him to step backward, at which time defendant's gun accidentally discha
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 California DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|