What is the evidence supporting a finding the superior court's finding implied malice murder?

Ample evidence supported the superior court's finding the People proved beyond a reasonable doubt Villegas was guilty of implied malice murder. In evading officers for 10 miles, Villegas drove 85 miles per hour through residential neighborhoods, drove on the wrong side of the road, ran through stop signs and red lights, nearly hit a bus, and finally skidded across multiple lanes of traffic before crashing into a telephone pole violently enough to kill his passenger. He admitted he knew what he was doing was very dangerous and might hurt people. That admission, as the superior court observed, was icing on a substantial cake of circumstantial evidence showing that the natural consequences of the way Villegas drove while evading police were dangerous to life, that he knew his driving endangered human life, and that he drove with conscious disregard for life. (See People v. Watson, supra, 30 Cal.3d at pp. 300-301 [evidence supported a finding the defendant committed implied malice murder where, while intoxicated, he "drove at highly excessive speeds through city streets" and "nearly collided with a vehicle after running a red light" before crashing into the victims' car]; People v. Moore (2010) 187 Cal.App.4th 937, 941 [substantial evidence supported

Page 17