People v. Garcia
2008 Cal. App. LEXIS 583, 74 Cal. Rptr. 3d 912, 162 Cal. App. 4th 18 (2008)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An unlawful killing committed without malice during the commission of an inherently dangerous felony, such as assault with a deadly weapon, constitutes at least voluntary manslaughter, not involuntary manslaughter.
Facts:
- After drinking beer and wine, Victor Garcia argued with his girlfriend and then left her home.
- Garcia, holding a handgun, encountered and struck Juan Avila, causing Avila to fall and flee.
- Garcia later left his girlfriend's home again, this time carrying a shotgun, and went to a local market.
- Outside the market, Aristeo Gonzalez confronted Garcia, telling him to put the gun away.
- The two men argued, and Gonzalez moved toward or lunged at Garcia.
- Garcia struck Gonzalez in the face with the butt of the shotgun.
- Gonzalez fell backward, struck his head on the sidewalk, and subsequently died from blunt force head trauma.
- Garcia testified that he reacted automatically to Gonzalez lunging at him and did not intend to kill Gonzalez or hit him specifically in the face.
Procedural Posture:
- Victor Garcia was charged in a California trial court with the murder of Aristeo Gonzalez, as well as several counts of assault.
- At trial, the court declined Garcia's request to instruct the jury on involuntary manslaughter as a lesser included offense of murder.
- The jury found Garcia not guilty of murder but guilty of voluntary manslaughter for the death of Gonzalez.
- Garcia was also convicted on two counts of assault with a firearm.
- The trial court sentenced Garcia to an aggregate state prison term of 25 years and eight months.
- Garcia appealed the judgment to the California Court of Appeal, arguing the trial court erred by refusing to instruct the jury on involuntary manslaughter.
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 an unintentional killing resulting from an assault with a deadly weapon, an inherently dangerous felony, support a jury instruction for involuntary manslaughter as a lesser included offense of murder?
Opinions:
Majority - Perluss, P. J.
No. An unlawful killing during the commission of an inherently dangerous felony, even if unintentional, is at least voluntary manslaughter, and therefore the evidence would not support a conviction for involuntary manslaughter. The court reasoned that Garcia's act of striking Gonzalez with a shotgun constituted assault with a deadly weapon, which is an inherently dangerous felony. The statutory definition of involuntary manslaughter applies to killings that occur during an unlawful act not amounting to a felony (a misdemeanor) or during a lawful act performed with criminal negligence. While courts have extended involuntary manslaughter to killings during non-inherently dangerous felonies, the same logic does not apply to inherently dangerous ones. Citing modern case law which establishes that a specific intent to kill is not required for voluntary manslaughter, the court concluded that an unintentional killing without malice resulting from an inherently dangerous felony is properly classified as voluntary manslaughter, making an instruction on involuntary manslaughter inappropriate.
Analysis:
This case clarifies the boundary between voluntary and involuntary manslaughter when a death results from an underlying felony assault where the felony-murder rule is inapplicable due to the merger doctrine. It establishes that the commission of an inherently dangerous felony like assault with a deadly weapon sets a floor for criminal liability at voluntary manslaughter, even if the killing was unintentional and without malice. This holding prevents defendants in such cases from arguing for the lesser charge of involuntary manslaughter, thereby narrowing the range of potential verdicts for juries and solidifying the culpability for homicides resulting from violent felonious acts.
