Is a jury's failure to instruct on a manslaughter instruction prejudicial?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Conner, 2d Crim. No. B211016 (Cal. App. 8/13/2009), 2d Crim. No. B211016. (Cal. App. 2009):
In any event, if the trial court erred in not giving a manslaughter instruction, the error was harmless by any standard. The failure to instruct on a lesser included offense is not prejudicial if the jury necessarily resolved the question adversely to the defendant under other instructions. (People v. Mincey (1992) 2 Cal.4th 408, 438.) Here the trial court instructed: "If you find the defendant guilty of attempted murder, you must then decide whether the People have proved the additional allegation that the attempted murder was done willfully, and with deliberation and premeditation. [] The defendant acted willfully if he intended to kill when he acted. The defendant deliberated if he carefully weighed the considerations for and against his choice and, knowing the consequences, decided to kill. The defendant premeditated if he decided to kill before acting."
The jury found that the attempted murder was willful, deliberate and premeditated. That finding is necessarily inconsistent with manslaughter. (See People v. Wharton (1991) 53 Cal.3d 522, 572 [jury's finding of premeditated murder necessarily inconsistent with heat of passion].)
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur:
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
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.
