People v. Romero CA4/1
D085994
| Cal. Ct. App. | Aug 15, 2025Background
- Vicente David Romero was convicted of second-degree murder after giving Kelsey King half of a counterfeit "M30" pill believed to contain fentanyl, which resulted in her death.
- Romero knew the pills he had purchased contained fentanyl; he had previously overdosed on similar pills but believed overdoses meant prolonged unconsciousness, not a medical emergency.
- He gave half of a pill to King, warning her they were "strong" but believing her drug history made it safe for her.
- King died shortly after consuming the pill; the cause of death was a combination of fentanyl, heroin, and methamphetamine, but evidence linked the fatality closely to the fentanyl content.
- The jury was instructed on murder, including implied malice, and convicted Romero of second-degree murder; the court sentenced him to 15 years to life.
- Romero appealed, arguing (1) insufficient evidence of implied malice and (2) improper jury instructions regarding implied malice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of Evidence for Implied Malice | Evidence showed Romero knew the dangers of fentanyl and acted with conscious disregard for life. | No proof Romero subjectively knew giving half a pill endangered King; he tried to minimize risk. | Substantial evidence supported implied malice; conviction affirmed. |
| Jury Instruction on Implied Malice | Standard implied malice instruction (CALCRIM No. 520) is legally sufficient. | Instruction was vague; failed to state conduct must pose 'high probability of death' (per Reyes). | No instructional error; precedents approve instruction as given. |
| Abstract of Judgment Error | Should be corrected if date is incorrect. | Raised as a procedural point. | Remand to correct the date. |
| Appropriate Degree of Guilt | Supported murder due to implied malice. | Should be involuntary manslaughter due to lack of subjective awareness. | Majority affirms murder; dissent would reduce to involuntary manslaughter. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Knoller, 41 Cal.4th 139 (Cal. 2007) (clarifies implied malice requires awareness of conduct endangering human life)
- People v. Nieto Benitez, 4 Cal.4th 91 (Cal. 1992) (holds that the natural consequences language in jury instructions is equivalent to "high probability of death")
- People v. Swain, 12 Cal.4th 593 (Cal. 1996) (explains that implied malice does not require intent to kill)
- People v. Ceja, 4 Cal.4th 1134 (Cal. 1993) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of circumstantial evidence)