People v. Reese

California Court of Appeal Jun 23, 1986 No. Nos. F003447, F004129Published

Before: Franson

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the arson convictions, holding that the burning of a victim's clothing constitutes arson under Penal Code section 451. The court also affirmed Stephens's convictions and special circumstance finding, but reversed Reese's special circumstance finding.

Issues

Did the burning of the victim’s clothing constitute the crime of arson under Penal Code section 451?

Disposition. Affirmed in part and reversed in part.

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Did the burning of the victim’s clothing constitute the crime of arson? We answer the question in the affirmative.”

“The question thus becomes—did the Legislature intend by the expanded arson statute (§ 451) to protect personal clothing? We think that it did, particularly clothing being worn at the time of the burning or fire.”

Opinion

FRANSON, Acting P. J. The Cases Below

In an amended information, appellants James Reese, Jr., and William Stephens were accused of the crimes of murder in violation of Penal Code section 187 (count I), mayhem in violation of Penal Code section 203 (count II) and arson with great bodily injury in violation of Penal Code section 451, subdivision (a) (count III). As a special circumstance, it was alleged that the murder was intentional and involved the infliction of torture in violation of Penal Code section 190.2, subdivision (a)(18).2

Trials for the codefendants were severed. Each unsuccessfully moved to dismiss counts II and III and the special circumstance allegation. Thereafter, Reese was tried by a jury and Stephens by the court after a waiver of the [739]right to a jury trial. Each was found guilty on the three counts. Although the jury rejected the prosecution’s theory of a willful, deliberate and premeditated killing by Reese, it nevertheless found Reese guilty of first degree murder on three other theories; murder by torture, felony-murder mayhem and felony-murder arson. The jury also found the special circumstance to be true.

The trial court found Stephens guilty of first degree murder on four bases: a premedidated, deliberate and intentional killing, felony-murder arson, felony-murder mayhem and murder by torture. The special circumstance was also found to be true.

Appellants were sentenced to life without possibility of parol. For Reese, judgment was “suspended” on covmts II and III “pursuant to Penal Code section 654.” For Stephens, counts II and III were “stayed” for sentencing purposes.

For the reasons to be explained, we affirm the conviction of Reese for first degree murder, arson and mayhem; however, we reverse the jury’s special circumstance finding.

We affirm Stephens’s convictions and special circumstance finding in their entirety.

The Facts*

Discussion

Did the burning of the victim’s clothing constitute the crime of arson? We answer the question in the affirmative.

People v. Reese

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief