California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Davenport, 221 Cal.Rptr. 794, 41 Cal.3d 247, 710 P.2d 861 (Cal. 1985):
Appellant asserts that there were apparent inconsistencies between this instruction on the special circumstance--which required findings of intent to kill and suffering by the victim--and the instruction under section 189--which did not require intent to kill but did require intent to cause cruel pain and suffering for some sadistic purpose. 8 He claims the court failed to adequately explain to the jury the difference between first degree murder by torture and the special circumstance. This must inevitably have led to confusion in the minds of the jurors on a matter vital to the judgment and is reversible error. (People v. Dail (1943) 22 Cal.2d 642, 653, 140 P.2d 828.)
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.