Berry

People v. Berry

Good Law
1 Cal. App. 4th 778·1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 1415·2 Cal. Rptr. 2d 416·91 Daily Journal DAR 15319
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 11, 1991H006844California3,236 words

Opinion

Opinion

Capaccioli, J.

Statement of the Case

This case involves the killing of a small child by Willy, a pit bull owned by defendant Michael Patrick Berry. Defendant appeals from a judgment entered after a jury found him guilty of involuntary manslaughter, keeping a mischievous animal, keeping a fighting dog, and cultivating marijuana. (Pen. Code, §§ 192, subd. (b), 399, and 597.5, subd. (a)(1) and Health & Saf. Code, § 11358.) He claims the trial court erred in instructing the jury on involuntary manslaughter and keeping a mischievous animal. He further claims that as a matter of law he may not be held criminally liable for the child’s death and that the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions for involuntary manslaughter, keeping a mischievous dog, and keeping a fighting dog. He also claims the court abused its discretion in admitting autopsy pictures of victim.

We affirm the judgment.

Statement of Facts

James Soto, the victim, lived with his parents Yvonne Nunez and Arthur Soto and three siblings in a house located behind defendant’s on Wright Avenue in Morgan Hill. The two houses were close to each other and shared a common driveway.

Defendant, who was interested and…

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.