Is there any error or error in an instruction given by the Court in the context of specific intent in the definition of first degree murder?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Cooley, 211 Cal.App.2d 173, 27 Cal.Rptr. 543 (Cal. App. 1962):
[211 Cal.App.2d 208] On the merits, the subject matter of this instruction was in fact covered by the charge given by the court. In defining first degree murder on the theory that it was wilful, deliberate and premeditated, the court stated that 'the killing must be accompanied by a clear, deliberate intent to take life,' and in defining first degree murder on the theory that it was a murder by torture, the court stated that the essential elements were acts of the defendant which took the life of a human being, 'done with the intent to cause cruel pain and suffering; * * *' There was no error in this regard. (People v. Donnelly, 190 Cal. 57, 59, 210 P. 523.)
(3) CALJIC 72-B, Concerning Specific Intent.
The instruction reads:
"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.
