legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Hill
Defendant was found guilty by jury trial of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187);[1] special circumstances allegations that the murder occurred during the commission of attempted robbery and burglary or attempted burglary (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(A) & (G)) were found true. He was sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.[2] Defendant raises two issues on appeal: (1) that the trial court erred in admitting his statement to the police, as it was involuntary; and (2) that the trial court committed reversible error in failing to instruct upon the required elements for felony murder special circumstances if the jury determined that defendant was not the actual killer (those elements being that he either had the intent to kill, or that he was a major participant in the underlying felony and acted with reckless indifference to human life). The trial court’s determination that defendant’s statement was voluntary was not error. While we accept the concession of the Attorney General that the trial court erred in omitting the referenced elements of the felony murder special circumstances from its instructions to the jury, we find the error to be harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. (Chapman v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 18 (Chapman).) Accordingly, we affirm.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale