PEOPLE v. LEDESMA PART-VI
Where defendant was accused of murdering victim to keep him from testifying about previous robbery and of robbing victim again at time of murder. The trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on the lesser offense of theft regarding the second robbery where there was substantial evidence from which the jury could have concluded that the intent to steal from the victim was not formed until after the murder, making the offense theft rather than robbery. California's practice of charging by information after a preliminary hearing does not violate the federal Constitution, even in capital cases.
Comments on PEOPLE v. LEDESMA PART-VI