California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Norbury, A137324 (Cal. App. 2015):
In sum, we conclude section 189 unambiguously applies to a defendant who discharges a firearm from a motor vehicle, regardless of whether or not it can be said the shooter was "in" or "inside" the motor vehicle. Even assuming any ambiguity, "[t]he legislative history, the purpose of the statute, general public policy concerns, and logic all favor an interpretation" of the term "motor vehicle," as used in section 189, to include a motorized all terrain vehicle. (People v. Manzo (2012) 53 Cal.4th 880, 889.) Consequently, the trial court's instruction to the jury is a correct statement of the law. Accordingly, defendant's claim of error fails.11
Page 13
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.