People v. Davis

California Court of Appeal Apr 27, 1962 No. Crim. 3993Published

Before: Devine

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support a second-degree murder conviction and that the trial court properly rejected a requested jury instruction on self-defense that failed to correctly state the reasonable person standard.

Issues

Whether the evidence was sufficient to support a conviction for second-degree murder rather than a finding of self-defense.
Whether the trial court erred in refusing the defendant's requested jury instruction regarding the doctrine of appearance in self-defense.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“There is nothing in the evidence in this ease which would compel the conclusion of self-defense as a matter of law.”

“The jury was entitled to disbelieve appellant’s claim of self-defense, and to determine that implied malice existed”

“The instruction was faulty in its reference to viewing of the circumstances “from the standpoint of the defendant,””

DEVINE, J.

A second degree murder judgment and order denying motion for new trial are appealed. The killing occurred in a barroom. Decedent, Smith, who, apparently, was unknown to defendant, insulted women patrons of the bar, pushed or shoved defendant, who was sitting at the bar, perhaps three times, cursed defendant and threatened to kick him. Defendant remonstrated with decedent for cursing the women, asked decedent to “leave us alone” and told decedent he might get hurt, cursing women as he was doing. Decedent took off his coat and draped it over his arm.

As the cursing went on, someone told defendant he didn’t have to take that. Whether Smith had his right hand in his own pocket at the moment defendant stabbed him, or whether Smith was making a motion toward shoving defendant again, is a matter on which the witnesses do not agree. Defendant struck Smith with a knife with such force that it penetrated his breastbone, heart and aorta.

Appellant contended for self-defense, on the proposition that Smith had one hand in his pocket at the moment, was using the coat as a shield, was cursing defendant and

[20]

threatening to kick him, and appellant feared Smith would pull out a knife or brass knuckles and attack him. However, no weapon was found on deceased, nor did defendant or anyone else see a weapon.

Immediately following the stabbing, defendant left the place with other patrons of the bar, whom he told to say that they did not see a knife. He asked one of them to wash the knife which he gave her and which had blood on it. He stated that he had cut Smith because Smith was cursing out two of the women patrons. When he learned that Smith was dead, appellant surrendered to the police, but he gave a false statement that he had no knife, but only a ring on his finger when he struck Smith.

Self-defense is a question of fact and requires in the actor a real fear of serious bodily injury and an appearance of danger of such injury which would arouse such fear in the mind of a reasonable man. (Pen. Code, § 198;

People

Ranson,

People v. Davis

AI Brief

DEVINE, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief