People v. Hansen case brief summary
885 P.2d 1022 (1994)
CASE FACTS
Defendant, during a drug purchase, gave money to the resident of a duplex dwelling. After failing to receive drugs in return, defendant fired several shots at the dwelling. One person in the dwelling was fatally shot. At trial, defendant was convicted of second degree murder and discharging a firearm at an inhabited dwelling, and the trial court found a firearm use enhancement. On initial appeal, the appeals court held that the murder did not merge with the discharge of the firearm, but struck the firearm use enhancement.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The court reversed the appeals court's reversal of the trial court's firearm-use enhancement in defendant's conviction for second degree murder, holding that defendant's conduct of discharging a firearm into a dwelling was inherently dangerous to human life and did not merge with the resulting homicide to preclude the felony murder rule, and affirmed the remainder of defendant's conviction.
Recommended Supplements for Criminal Law
885 P.2d 1022 (1994)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Defendant challenged his conviction
from the Superior Court of San Diego County (California), for second
degree murder under Cal. Penal Code § 246, contending that
discharging a weapon into a dwelling was not inherently dangerous to
human life under the controlling statute, and that the doctrine of
merger applied to his offense conduct.CASE FACTS
Defendant, during a drug purchase, gave money to the resident of a duplex dwelling. After failing to receive drugs in return, defendant fired several shots at the dwelling. One person in the dwelling was fatally shot. At trial, defendant was convicted of second degree murder and discharging a firearm at an inhabited dwelling, and the trial court found a firearm use enhancement. On initial appeal, the appeals court held that the murder did not merge with the discharge of the firearm, but struck the firearm use enhancement.
DISCUSSION
- The state then appealed and the court analyzed the application of the felony murder rule under the firearm discharge provisions of Cal. Penal Code § 246.
- The court held that the felony murder rule applied because the felony did not need to result in death, but was a felony independent of the resulting second degree murder.
- Further, because second degree murder did not necessarily involve the use of a firearm, the trial court's enhancement was proper.
- The court affirmed the court of appeals ruling, except for its striking of the firearm enhancement, and affirmed the trial court's convictions of defendant.
CONCLUSION
The court reversed the appeals court's reversal of the trial court's firearm-use enhancement in defendant's conviction for second degree murder, holding that defendant's conduct of discharging a firearm into a dwelling was inherently dangerous to human life and did not merge with the resulting homicide to preclude the felony murder rule, and affirmed the remainder of defendant's conviction.
Recommended Supplements for Criminal Law
No comments:
Post a Comment