Mills

People v. Mills

Caution
147 Cal. Rptr. 3d 833·2012 Cal. LEXIS 9721·55 Cal. 4th 663·286 P.3d 754
Supreme Court of CaliforniaOctober 18, 2012S191934California7,795 words

Opinion

Opinion

Corrigan, J.

“When a defendant pleads not guilty by reason of insanity, and also joins with it another plea or pleas, the defendant shall first be tried as if only such other plea or pleas had been entered, and in that trial the defendant shall be conclusively presumed to have been sane at the time the offense is alleged to have been committed.” (Pen. Code, § 1026, subd. (a).) In this case defendant was charged with murder, pled not guilty, and also raised an insanity defense. At the guilt phase trial, the prosecutor requested a jury instruction that defendant was conclusively presumed to have been sane at the time of the offense. Defendant objected that the instruction might lead the jury to disregard the evidence of his mental illness and its effect on the intent required for murder. The court overruled the objection, gave the instruction on the presumption of sanity, and refused defendant’s request for an instruction on the legal definition of sanity.

The jury convicted defendant of first degree murder. In the subsequent sanity trial it found that he was sane at the time of the offense. The court sentenced him to a term of 50 years to life in prison. On appeal below, defendant…

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.