From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Banks

Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division Two
Nov 14, 1936
17 Cal.App.2d 508 (Cal. Ct. App. 1936)

Opinion

Docket No. 2912.

November 14, 1936.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County and from an order denying a new trial. Samuel R. Blake, Judge. Reversed.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

David Blonder and Carl Katleman for Appellant.

U.S. Webb, Attorney-General, and Alberta Belford, Deputy Attorney-General, for Respondent.


The defendant was charged with the crime of negligent homicide in violation of section 500 of the Vehicle Code, a felony, in that the defendant did operate an automobile "in a negligent and unlawful manner" resulting in injuries causing the death within one year of Lem Fong. At a former trial the jurors were unable to agree upon a verdict and a mistrial was declared. At a second trial the jury found the defendant guilty, and this appeal is from a judgment of conviction and an order denying a new trial.

[1] The defendant was not charged with having caused the injuries "in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to a felony". Nevertheless, the trial court gave an instruction to the effect that it was not necessary to find that the injuries were caused by the driving of the automobile in a negligent manner but that it was sufficient if the jurors found the injuries were caused in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to a felony. The same instruction was condemned in the case of People v. Okada, 14 Cal.App. (2d) 660 [ 58 P.2d 967], decided by this court on June 18, 1936. During its deliberation on the case, the jury asked the court for additional instructions on this very point, and the court emphasized and reiterated its instruction to the effect that it was sufficient if the jurors found the injuries were caused in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to a felony.

The instruction was erroneous and prejudicial to defendant's rights and a reversal of the judgment is inescapable under the authority of People v. Okada, supra. There are other contentions with regard to the instructions which it is not necessary for us to consider. They will not arise upon a retrial of the case.

Judgment and order reversed.

Wood, J., concurred.


Summaries of

People v. Banks

Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division Two
Nov 14, 1936
17 Cal.App.2d 508 (Cal. Ct. App. 1936)
Case details for

People v. Banks

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Respondent, v. LOUIS BANKS, Appellant

Court:Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division Two

Date published: Nov 14, 1936

Citations

17 Cal.App.2d 508 (Cal. Ct. App. 1936)
62 P.2d 160

Citing Cases

People v. Wilson

It is said that the question of ordinary negligence was not within the issues. People v. Okada, 14 Cal.App.2d…