Jung

People v. Jung

Good Law
71 Cal. App. 4th 1036·84 Cal. Rptr. 2d 5
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 25, 1999B114721California11,101 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Grignon, J.

Defendant and appellant Dale J. Jung appeals from a judgment following two jury trials. In the first jury trial, defendant Jung was convicted of kidnapping (Pen. Code, § 207, subd. (a)) 1 and mayhem (§ 203) and a great bodily injury allegation was found to be true (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)). The jury was unable to reach a verdict on the charge of torture (§ 206). In the second jury trial, he was convicted of torture. He was sentenced to life in prison. He contends the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction for torture; his life sentence constitutes cruel and unusual punishment; the trial court erred when it denied his request for a mistrial; and the trial court erred when it denied his requests for a continuance and to reopen, and struck the testimony of a witness.

Defendant and appellant Thi Van Nguyen appeals from a judgment following a jury trial. He was tried with defendant Jung in defendant Jung’s second jury trial and was convicted of kidnapping, mayhem, and torture and a great bodily injury allegation was found to be true. He was sentenced to life in prison. He contends the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction for torture; the trial court…

Dissenting Opinion

Armstrong, J.

— I respectfully dissent.

I do not believe that the record contains substantial evidence that appellants intended to cause Hyon cruel or extreme pain and suffering, a necessary element of the crime of torture, or that the conduct for which appellants were convicted constitutes torture within the meaning of Penal Code section 206. Consequently, I would reduce their torture convictions to the lesser included offense of battery.

*1044 As the majority notes, torture is a newly codified crime in California, created on June 5, 1990, when the California electorate passed Proposition 115 in response to the facts in People v. Singleton (1980) 112 Cal.App.3d 418 [ 169 Cal.Rptr. 333 ]. (See Review of Selected California Legislation— Addendum — Proposition 115: The Crime Victims Justice Reform Act (1990-1991) 22 Pacific L.J. 1010, 1012.) Penal Code section 206 defines torture as follows: “Every person who, with the intent to cause cruel or extreme pain and suffering for the purpose of revenge, extortion, persuasion, or for any sadistic purpose, inflicts great bodily injury as defined in Section 12022.7 upon the person of another, is guilty of torture. ft[] The crime of torture does not…

Opinion

Certified for Partial Publication. [*]

Defendant and appellant Dale Jung appeals from a judgment following two jury trials. In the first jury trial, defendant Jung was convicted of kidnapping (Pen.Code, § 207, subd. (a)) [1] and mayhem (§ 203) and a great bodily injury allegation was found to be true (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)). The jury was unable to reach a verdict on the charge of torture (§ 206). In the second jury trial, he was convicted of torture. He was sentenced to life in prison. He contends the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction for torture; his life sentence constitutes cruel and unusual punishment; the trial court erred when it denied his request for a mistrial; and the trial court erred when it denied his requests for a continuance and to reopen, and struck the testimony of a witness.

Defendant and appellant Thi Van Nguyen appeals from a judgment following a jury trial. He was tried with defendant Jung in defendant Jung's second jury trial and was convicted of kidnapping, mayhem, and torture and a great bodily injury allegation was found to be true. He was sentenced to life in prison. He contends the evidence was insufficient to support his…

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.