Legal Opinion · Concurrence

People v. Concha

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 18, 2008No. B195197Published

1Concurrence

I concur in the judgment except I would reduce the murder convictions from first to second degree. I agree with the Attorney General that there is substantial evidence to support liability on a provocative act theory. But defendants are correct: the fact that the provocative act theory applies does not permit the return of first degree murder verdicts; transferred intent rules do not apply to this case; and because the decedent, Max Sanchez, was an accomplice, the first degree findings cannot be justified on a felony-murder rule theory. The provocative act doctrine is a form of implied malice…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. People v. WashingtonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1965
  2. People v. SanchezCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
  3. People v. SappCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
  4. People v. Nieto BenitezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
  5. People v. BraxtonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API