Rolon

People v. Rolon

Bad Law
160 Cal. App. 4th 1206·2008 Cal. App. LEXIS 351·73 Cal. Rptr. 3d 358
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 11, 2008B197488California5,698 words

Opinion

Opinion

Epstein, J.

In the published portion of this opinion, we hold that a parent has a duty to protect his or her young child and may be criminally culpable on an aider and abettor theory for an assault causing death and on an implied malice theory for murder where the parent fails to take reasonably necessary steps for the child’s protection, so long as the parent, with ability to do so, fails to take those steps with the intent of facilitating the perpetrator’s assaultive offense. We hold that the evidence in this case was sufficient to support guilt for the child’s death on either theory. In the unpublished portion of this opinion, we hold that the trial court properly refused to instruct the jury on the defense of duress. We affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY

Anthony Bill Lopez was the father of six of appellant’s seven children, including her one-year-old son Isaac. Although a court order prohibited appellant from allowing Lopez to visit or stay at her apartment, he had stayed there for about a week before the homicide in this case. The court order also forbade any unmonitored contact between Lopez and appellant’s children, and appellant was not permitted to act as the…

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.