People v. Amezcua CA5

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 7, 2014F064904California9,343 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kane, J.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

I. The night of the shooting

The victim, Victor Raqueno, died of a massive hemorrhage of the left common carotid artery inflicted by a .22- to .40-caliber bullet. Numerous witnesses offered accounts of the events leading to his death.

“A defendant who has killed without malice in the commission of an inherently dangerous assaultive felony must have killed without either an intent to kill or a conscious disregard for life. Such a killing cannot be voluntary manslaughter because voluntary manslaughter requires either an intent to kill or a conscious disregard for life. To the extent that [Garcia] suggested otherwise, it is now disapproved.” In view of Bryant, Amezcua’s alternative argument that the court was obliged under Garcia to instruct the jury on voluntary manslaughter as a lesser included offense of murder has been rendered moot. Second, if our court concludes that the claimed instructional errors—i.e., the trial court’s failure to instruct on involuntary manslaughter and failure to properly instruct on specific intent and/or mental state—were either “invited, waived, or forfeited,” Amezcua asserts that “he received ineffective assistance when…

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.