P.

INTRODUCTION

While driving his truck under the influence of alcohol, defendant Gustavo Adrian Vega sped through a red light, and collided with a car in an intersection, killing the passenger in the car. Defendant was convicted by a jury of murder, felony hit and run, and possession of a controlled substance. We affirm. On appeal, defendant argues there was insufficient evidence supporting his convictions for murder and felony hit and run. Substantial evidence supports those convictions. Defendant also argues the trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury on the defense of duress. That defense was not applicable to the murder charge, and there was not substantial evidence to support the defense on felony hit and run. Accordingly, there was no error in failing to instruct the jury on duress. Defendant next argues the trial court erred under Penal Code section 1138, when it answered the jury‟s question during deliberations regarding the defense of necessity. We find no error in the court‟s response to the jury‟s question. Finally, we reject defendant‟s argument that the trial court should have instructed the jury that gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated is a lesser…