James

I.

INTRODUCTION

In a bifurcated trial, a jury found appellant Dennis Lamar James guilty of mayhem and assault producing great bodily injury, but then found him not guilty by reason of insanity. Appellant contends that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on unconsciousness as a defense to all charges during the guilt phase of the bifurcated trial. We conclude that the evidentiary record included substantial evidence that appellant was unconscious, within the legal meaning of the defense of unconsciousness, when he committed the offenses, and the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on that defense. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment.

II.

PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUNDS

A. Pretrial Procedural Background The Alameda County District Attorney filed an amended criminal information charging appellant with aggravated mayhem (Pen. Code1, § 205) and assault likely to

1 All further statutory reference are to the Penal Code, unless otherwise indicated.

1 produce great bodily injury (§ 245, subd. (a)(4)) on Yvette Thigpen on February 19, 2012. The amended information also alleged that appellant had suffered three prior convictions, one of which was…