Dixon

People v. Dixon

Good Law
1995 Cal. App. LEXIS 206·32 Cal. App. 4th 1547·38 Cal. Rptr. 2d 859·95 Daily Journal DAR 3024
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 6, 1995B082986California4,357 words

Opinion

Opinion

Turner, J.

I. Introduction

Defendant, Michael Sims Dixon, appeals his conviction for second degree murder plus a finding he personally used a firearm. (Pen. Code, §§ 187, 12022.5.) He raises various contentions on appeal, but in the published portion of this opinion, we address the issue of whether the trial judge had a sua sponte duty to instruct the jury on the lesser included offenses of voluntary and involuntary manslaughter. We conclude no sua sponte duty to instruct as to those crimes existed because there was no substantial evidence to support those two lesser offenses and affirm the judgment.

II. Discussion

A., B.

C. Manslaughter instructions

Defendant argues that the trial judge had a sua sponte duty to instruct the jury concerning the lesser and necessarily included offenses of voluntary and involuntary manslaughter. (§§ 192, subds. (a) and (b).) The testimony at trial indicated that Donald Gilbert, a school custodian and caretaker, saw the shooting. According to Mr. Gilbert, the decedent, Vanessa Forrest, was arguing with four men, one of whom was defendant. Mr. Gilbert could hear the decedent loudly stating, “ ‘No, I don’t want to get in the car.’ ” The four men,…

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.