Munoz
People v. Munoz
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Bendix, J.
*148 Defendant Ryan Munoz appeals from the judgment after a jury convicted him of second degree murder. Munoz, while driving under the influence of alcohol, collided *320 with another vehicle on the freeway, killing the passenger and injuring the driver. The prosecution charged him with murder under a theory of implied malice, as permitted under People v. Watson (1981) 30 Cal.3d 290 , 179 Cal.Rptr. 43 , 637 P.2d 279 ( Watson ).
On appeal, Munoz raises numerous challenges to the trial court's refusal to instruct the jury on any lesser included offenses to murder. He argues that evidence adduced at the preliminary hearing supplied the necessary elements to deem gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated a lesser included offense of murder, even if those elements were absent from the accusatory pleading itself. He argues that the express exclusion of vehicular homicides *149 from the involuntary manslaughter statute violates his constitutional rights to due process and equal protection of the laws. Finally, he argues that the prosecution was fundamentally unfair to structure the accusatory pleading to deny him instructions on lesser included offenses.