47 Cal.App.5th 838
Cal. Ct. App.2020Background
- Defendant Corbin Dennis (16 at the time) and co-defendant approached groups near abandoned railroad tracks; shots were fired by co-defendant Mendoza, wounding one victim; a second robbery occurred minutes later.
- Dennis was charged with three counts of attempted murder (Pen. Code §§ 187, 664(a)), three counts of second-degree robbery, three counts of assault with a semiautomatic firearm, and gang enhancements; jury convicted on all counts and found true special findings that the attempted murders were willful, deliberate, and premeditated.
- Trial theory for attempted murder: aiding and abetting under the natural and probable consequences (NPC) doctrine based on the target offense of challenging another to fight (§ 415(1)).
- Sentenced to an aggregate of 23 years 8 months plus three consecutive 15-years-to-life terms (one for each attempted-murder count).
- Dennis appealed, arguing (1) Senate Bill No. 1437 entitles him to relief (it abolishes some vicarious murder liability), (2) insufficient evidence for attempted murder and for the § 415(1) target offense, and (3) instructional error: jury was not required to find that attempted premeditated murder was a natural and probable consequence of the target offense.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (People) | Defendant's Argument (Dennis) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1) Does SB 1437 apply to attempted murder convicted under NPC? | SB 1437 addresses murder, not attempted murder; it does not disturb aider-and-abettor liability for attempts. | SB 1437’s prohibition on vicarious malice requires relief for attempted-murder convictions obtained via NPC. | Held: SB 1437 does not apply to attempted murder; defendant not entitled to relief under SB 1437. |
| 2) Were the special findings of willfulness/deliberation/premeditation valid where jury was not instructed that premeditation must be the natural and probable consequence of the target crime? (Alleyne challenge) | Favor and state law permit separate penalty finding without requiring foreseeability of premeditation; jury instructions were adequate. | Failure to require the jury to find that premeditated attempted murder was a natural and probable consequence violated Sixth Amendment (facts increasing minimum penalty are elements). | Held: Special findings vacated. Under Alleyne, the jury must find that premeditated attempted murder was a natural and probable consequence; failure to so instruct violated defendant’s Sixth Amendment rights. Remanded for prosecution to decide whether to retry the special findings. |
| 3) Can attempted premeditated murder be sustained under NPC as a matter of state law (post-Chiu)? | NPC can sustain attempted murder convictions; Favor supports permitting premeditation findings after a general NPC-based attempted-murder conviction. | Chiu and Mejia suggest premeditation is too subjective to be imputed by NPC; attempted premeditated murder may not be a valid NPC-based offense. | Held: Court acknowledged Chiu/Mejia tension with Favor; indicated Chiu’s reasoning may bar NPC-based attempted premeditated murder under state law, but resolved this appeal on Alleyne grounds (vacating special findings and remanding). |
| 4) Was there sufficient evidence to support instructing and convicting on the target offense (§ 415(1): challenge to fight) and thus to support NPC liability for attempted murder? | Evidence (approach, "Where you from?", gang expert testimony, location in rival territory) supported a reasonable inference of a challenge to fight; instruction and convictions proper. | The facts did not legally constitute a challenge to fight; instruction was erroneous and convictions should be reversed for insufficiency. | Held: Substantial evidence supported the § 415(1) instruction and the NPC-based attempted-murder convictions. |
Key Cases Cited
- Alleyne v. United States, 570 U.S. 99 (U.S. 2013) (facts that increase mandatory minimum punishment are elements that the jury must find beyond a reasonable doubt)
- People v. Favor, 54 Cal.4th 868 (Cal. 2012) (held jury need not find foreseeability of premeditation under NPC when imposing enhanced sentence for attempted premeditated murder)
- People v. Chiu, 59 Cal.4th 155 (Cal. 2014) (held aider-and-abettor liability for first-degree murder cannot rest on the NPC doctrine because premeditation is too subjective)
- People v. Lee, 31 Cal.4th 613 (Cal. 2003) (interpreted § 664(a) sentencing: life exposure depends on whether the attempted murder itself was willful, deliberate, and premeditated)
- People v. Lopez, 38 Cal.App.5th 1087 (Cal. Ct. App. 2019) (held SB 1437 does not apply to attempted murder)
- People v. Munoz, 39 Cal.App.5th 738 (Cal. Ct. App. 2019) (same as Lopez)
- People v. Medrano, 42 Cal.App.5th 1001 (Cal. Ct. App. 2019) (contrary view that SB 1437 applies to attempted murder)
- People v. Mejia, 40 Cal.App.5th 42 (Cal. Ct. App. 2019) (applied Chiu to conclude NPC cannot sustain attempted first-degree murder convictions)