xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word"
xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">

Filed 2/17/06 P

P. v. Nhim

Filed 2/17/06 P. v. Nhim CA3

NOT
TO BE PUBLISHED>>

California Rules
of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on
opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as
specified by rule 977(b). This opinion
has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of
rule 977.>>

style='mso-bidi-font-weight:normal'> >>

IN THE COURT OF
APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE
DISTRICT

(San Joaquin)

----

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

PETER NHIM,

Defendant and Appellant.

C048547

(Super.
Ct. No. SF091248A)

A jury convicted
defendant Peter Nhim of second degree
murder (Pen. Code, § 187) and found he personally
used a knife in the commission of the crime (Pen. Code, § 12022, subd.
(b)(1)). The court sentenced him to
prison for 16 years to life.

Defendant's sole
contention on appeal is that the trial court prejudicially erred in refusing to
instruct the jury on imperfect self-defense pursuant to CALJIC No. 5.17. style="mso-spacerun: yes"> Finding no error, we shall affirm the
judgment.

FACTS

The Prosecution's Case>>

In March 2004 Christine Yin and her nine-year-old son, Dallas,
flew from Philadelphia to Stockton to visit Yin's daughter who was in the
hospital. Defendant's mother, Paula
Rin, picked up Yin and Dallas from the airport and insisted they stay with
her. Rin and Yin were best friends and
had worked together in a hair salon.

On the morning of
March 6, 2004, as Yin and Rin prepared to leave the house for the hair salon,
Dallas asked to remain at the house so he could play with defendant's
14-year-old brother, Andrew. Yin agreed
and told Andrew to watch her son.

After Yin and Rin
left, Andrew and Dallas watched television in the â€

Description	A decision regarding second degree murder.
Rating	0/5 1 2 3 4 5 0/5 based on 0 votes.