Phillips

People v. Phillips

Good Law
2000 Cal. App. LEXIS 662·2000 Daily Journal DAR 9309·83 Cal. App. 4th 170·99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 448·2000 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7045
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 21, 2000B130959California900 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gilbert, J.

California employs the M’Naghten test for insanity. an must ing the nature of his or her act, or distinguishing right from wrong. Here we conclude that the test for idiocy is the same.

Charles Phillips was found guilty of second degree robbery. (Pen. Code, § 211.) The jury also found that a principal in the robbery was armed with a firearm. (§ 12022, subd. (a)(1).) * Phillips contends he cannot commit a crime because he is an idiot within the meaning of section 26. [[/]]* We affirm.

[[/]]

Facts

On August 16, 1998, Phillips and Lacey Harris entered a 7-Eleven store on West Pico Boulevard. At 4:30 a.m. the store clerk, Surinder Kumar, was in front of the counter. Harris hit Kumar on the head with a handgun and ordered him to open the cash registers. Harris removed $70 from one register and $25 to $35 from another register.

Phillips said he wanted beer. Harris held the gun to Kumar’s back and the three of them went to the refrigerator. Harris and Phillips took a case of malt liquor.

Harris told Phillips to search Kumar’s pockets for money. Phillips took $10 from Kumar’s pocket.

Harris ordered Kumar to give them food stamps. Phillips said he wanted cigarettes. Harris…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.