Fabris

People v. Fabris

Caution
1995 Cal. App. LEXIS 31·31 Cal. App. 4th 685·37 Cal. Rptr. 2d 667·95 Daily Journal DAR 726·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 456
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 17, 1995C009819California6,377 words

Opinion

Opinion

Blease, J.

A jury convicted the defendant of one count of arson of an inhabited structure (Pen. Code, § 451, subd. (b)) and one count of presentation of a fraudulent insurance claim (former Ins. Code, § 556, subd. (a)(1) [Stats. 1988, ch. 1609, § 1, p. 5864].) The court suspended the imposition of sentence and placed the defendant on probation for five years on condition he pay restitution in the amount of $53,000 and serve a one-year jail term.

In the published portion of the opinion we reject defendant’s argument, predicated upon In re Stonewall F. (1989) 208 Cal.App.3d 1054 [ 256 Cal.Rptr. 578 ], that the trial court prejudicially erred in instructing the jury that arson requires a general criminal intent.

In Stonewall F. we held that arson, as it is defined in section 451, requires an intent to set fire to or bum or cause to be burned a structure, forest land or specified property. That definition was given in this case as part of CALJIC No. 14.80. We adhere to Stonewall F. and conclude that the jury was properly instructed and that an instruction on general intent, also given the jury, is consistent with the instruction as given.

Accordingly, after modifying the order of…

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.