People v. Patel CA2/5
Opinion
Opinion
I. INTRODUCTION
Defendant Maya Patel appeals from her convictions for child abuse, driving while intoxicated, and resisting a peace officer, arguing that the trial court erred when it refused to instruct the jury on the affirmative defense of necessity. We affirm.
II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
A. Prosecution’s Case
On the night of January 1, 2023, Shana Ruder was awakened by her dogs barking at “a lot of commotion” outside her Lumber Street residence in Lancaster, including people yelling and a car horn honking. She heard a combination of male and female voices and “excessive” honking, like someone “laying on the horn” at least 10 times. Ruder went outside and saw a Prius driving in and out of her next-door neighbors’ driveway “aggressively.” Although her neighbors—defendant and her domestic partner Emmanuel Erby—had argued before, Ruder described this scene as “way different” and “out of the ordinary.”1 She called 911 and reported that her “‘neighbor [was] trying to run over [Erby] with a car out in the middle of the street.’” Ruder observed Erby walking in the middle of his driveway as defendant drove a car toward him, “going fast”, causing him to