Case BriefCrim law, homicide, depraved heart murderHughes, 2/21/15Identity of CasePeople v. Knoller, 158 P.3d 731 (Cal. 2007). Page 376 of the casebook.Summary of Facts/Procedural HistoryKnoller and spouse are holding their convicted clients attack dogs in lieu of payment, and the attack dogskill someone (big fucking surprise). Prior to this, the dogs had attacked others, had killed several sheep, etc. The vets and the previous owners had both recommended to Knoller that the dogs be put down because they were out of control. Knoller, a 130 pound woman, kept the two attack dogs in her apartment. Charged at bench trial with manslaughter, state appeals on the basis that judge (it was a bench trial) did not follow the proper instructions for depraved heart murder. Judge’s instructions: had to know that dogs would kill someone that day. Actual instructions: had to know that dogs could kill. Statement of the IssueWhat is the proper jury instruction for depraved heart murder by pet? HoldingDisregarding a substantial risk of death following subjective knowledge. ReasoningThat day: not necessary. Because the risk could occur at any time, defendants were continually disregarding the risk. Defendant’s appeal on lack of subjective knowledge not successful, because they fucking knew.
View Full Document
Unlocking...