Batchelor

People v. Batchelor

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 8, 2014E054475MCalifornia5,848 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. INTRODUCTION

Defendant Larry Jason Batchelor appeals from his conviction—in two separate

trials—of implied malice murder (Pen. Code, 2 § 187, subd. (a), count 1) and gross

vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated (§ 191.5, subd. (a), count 2).

As to the first trial, defendant contends (1) the evidence was insufficient to support

his conviction of gross vehicular manslaughter, and (2) the prosecutor improperly

commented on defendant’s exercise of his right to a jury trial and improperly vouched for

the People’s case. As to the second trial, defendant contends: (1) the evidence was

insufficient to support his conviction of implied malice murder; (2) former section 224

violates principles of due process because it authorizes disparate treatment for the

prosecution and defense with respect to the admission of evidence of voluntary

intoxication to prove implied malice; (3) the trial court erred in refusing to permit defense

counsel to read or present to the jury section 188 and case law regarding implied malice;

2 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code except as otherwise indicated. 3 Defendant filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in case No.…

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.