Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Los Angeles County Superior Court, California Court of Appeals: Holding; Intent to kill is transferrable to anyone the defendant kills, and is not limited to a specific target; thus, a defendant who unintentionally kills a bystander rather than their target is guilty of murder. Court of Appeals reversed. Court membership; Chief Justice: Ronald ...
Jones (2000) 82 Cal.App.4th 663, a California Appeals court held that the charge of evading a police officer causing death was not an acceptable felony under the felony murder rule, as the offense was a felony specifically because it caused the death of a pedestrian.
A more extensive inquiry is usually necessary for specific-intent crimes." [ 2 ] Scheb emphasized the importance why it is necessary to establish a factual basis for the plea, before it is entered by the defendant: "The thoroughness of the court's determination of voluntariness and factual basis becomes important if a defendant later moves to ...
The rule of felony murder is a legal doctrine in some common law jurisdictions that broadens the crime of murder: when someone is killed (regardless of intent to kill) in the commission of a dangerous or enumerated crime (called a felony in some jurisdictions), the offender, and also the offender's accomplices or co-conspirators, may be found guilty of murder.
The crime of battery, for example, only requires the basic intent that the actor knew or should have known that his action would lead to harmful contact with the victim. A limited number of offences are defined to require a further element in addition to basic intent, and this additional element is termed specific intent. There are two classes ...
A specific intent crime requires the doing of an act coupled with specific intent or objective. Specific intent cannot be inferred from the act. The major specific intent crimes are: conspiracy (intent to have crime completed), attempt (intent to complete a crime – whether specific or not, but falling short in completing the crime),
People v. Stone, Supreme Court of California, 46 Cal. 4th 131, 92 Cal. Rptr. 3d 362 (2009), is a criminal case in which the court set precedent for a theory of liability that a defendant is guilty of a single attempt to murder when multiple potential victims are in the kill zone and no one is killed, but if the intended target is not killed and an untargeted person in the kill zone is killed ...
California recognizes three categories of crime, distinguishable by the gravity of offense and severity of punishment: Felonies, Misdemeanors, and Infractions. [2] Regardless of category or specific offense, all valid crimes are required to have two elements: 1) an act committed or omitted In California, and 2) an articulated punishment as ...