People v. Cervantes
26 Cal. 4th 860, 111 Cal. Rptr. 2d 148, 29 P.3d 225 (2001)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A defendant's provocative act is not the proximate cause of a death when the actual killers make an independent, willful, and malicious decision to kill a third party in a separate retaliatory act, as this constitutes an independent intervening cause that breaks the chain of causation.
Facts:
- Defendant Cervantes, a Highland Street gang member, attended a party hosted by the Alley Boys gang.
- Cervantes got into an argument with a woman, which led to a confrontation with an Alley Boys member, Juan Cisneros.
- Cisneros drew a gun and threatened Cervantes.
- Cervantes brandished his own handgun in response.
- Richard Linares, another Alley Boy, attempted to intervene by touching Cervantes's shoulder to de-escalate the situation.
- Cervantes reacted by shooting and wounding Linares.
- Following the shooting, a melee erupted between the gangs.
- A short time later, a group of Alley Boys spotted Hector Cabrera, a Highland Street gang member, entering his car to leave and killed him in a volley of gunfire.
Procedural Posture:
- Cervantes was charged in trial court with the murder of Hector Cabrera.
- The prosecution's sole theory for the murder charge was provocative act murder.
- A jury convicted Cervantes of second-degree murder.
- Cervantes, as appellant, appealed the conviction to the Court of Appeal.
- The Court of Appeal affirmed the murder conviction, with the state as appellee.
- The Supreme Court of California granted review to decide the proximate causation issue.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a defendant's provocative act of shooting a rival gang member proximately cause the death of the defendant's fellow gang member when rival gang members, in a separate, willful, and malicious act of revenge, kill him a short time later?
Opinions:
Majority - Baxter, J.
No. The defendant's act did not proximately cause the death because the subsequent revenge killing was an independent intervening act. The court reasoned that the provocative act murder doctrine typically applies when a victim or police officer responds defensively or reflexively with lethal force. Here, the Alley Boys who killed Cabrera were not responding in self-defense or as a direct reaction to a dilemma thrust upon them by Cervantes. Instead, they made a willful, deliberate, and malicious choice to commit a new, felonious act of murder against a third party who was not involved in the initial altercation. This free and deliberate intervention by the Alley Boys, intended to exploit the situation for revenge, broke the chain of causation, relieving Cervantes of liability for murder. The court held that foreseeability of a revenge killing, as testified by a gang expert, is insufficient to establish proximate cause when the intervening act is an independent, malicious murder.
Concurring - Kennard, J.
The author concurred with the majority's judgment and opinion for reasons stated in the companion case of People v. Sanchez.
Analysis:
This decision significantly narrows the scope of the provocative act murder doctrine by emphasizing the distinction between a dependent and an independent intervening cause. It establishes that a willful, malicious, and separate criminal act of revenge by a third party breaks the chain of proximate causation, even if the revenge was a foreseeable consequence in a gang context. This raises the bar for prosecutors, requiring them to prove that the killing was a direct and immediate response to the defendant's provocation, rather than a subsequent, calculated act of retaliation. The ruling provides a clearer defense for individuals whose initial unlawful acts are followed by independent crimes committed by others.
Unlock the full brief for People v. Cervantes