From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Gomez

Court of Appeal of California
Sep 8, 2008
D049431 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 8, 2008)

Opinion

D049431

9-8-2008

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. RUBEN GOMEZ, Defendant and Appellant.

Not to be Published


THE COURT:

The petition for rehearing is denied.

The unpublished opinion, filed August 13, 2008, is modified as follows:

1. In the second paragraph on page 24, the third sentence is modified and a footnote is added (additions in bold), so that the sentence reads:

Under the facts, it is difficult to imagine how a jury might have found that a reasonable person could have foreseen only the possibility of a homicide resulting from a misdemeanor or criminally negligent conduct, or from the commission of a non-inherently dangerous felony, which would be necessary for an involuntary manslaughter conviction.[Fn.]

2. Footnote 7 reads as follows:

Gomez raised the theory of how he could be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter based on a non-inherently dangerous felony for the first time in his petition for rehearing. A litigant may not raise an argument for the first time in a petition for rehearing. ( Reynolds v. Bement (2005) 36 Cal.4th 1075, 1092.) Nevertheless, we reject the notion that a jury could have found that a reasonable person in Gomezs position could have foreseen an unlawful death resulting from the commission of a non-inherently dangerous felony, under the circumstances of this case.

The addition of footnote 7 will require renumbering of all subsequent footnotes.

NO CHANGE IN THE JUDGMENT.


Summaries of

People v. Gomez

Court of Appeal of California
Sep 8, 2008
D049431 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 8, 2008)
Case details for

People v. Gomez

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. RUBEN GOMEZ, Defendant and…

Court:Court of Appeal of California

Date published: Sep 8, 2008

Citations

D049431 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 8, 2008)