People v. Hood

Supreme Court of California · 1969 · Criminal Law

Criminal Lawlesser included offensessua sponte instructionsassault with a deadly weapon on a peace officersimple assaultvoluntary intoxicationspecific intentgeneral intent

Facts

After drinking for several hours, defendant forced his way into his former girlfriend's house and beat her, prompting neighbors to call police. Uniformed officers entered the house, questioned the occupants, and Officer Elia moved to arrest defendant after defendant directed obscenities at him. A struggle followed, during which defendant obtained Elia's gun and fired twice, wounding Elia in both legs. Defendant testified that he thought Elia was drawing his gun to shoot him, raising issues about self-defense and whether Elia was acting within the scope of his duties.

Issue

Did the trial court err by failing to instruct, on its own motion, that assault with a deadly weapon is a lesser included offense of assault with a deadly weapon upon a peace officer when the evidence suggested the officer may have exceeded the scope of his duties or defendant reasonably believed so? Did the court also err by giving conflicting intoxication instructions on assault with intent to murder, and what effect should intoxication have on assault offenses on retrial?

Rule

A trial court must instruct sua sponte on general principles of law closely and openly connected with the facts, including lesser included offenses when supported by the evidence. When the evidence would permit a finding that a peace officer was not engaged in the performance of duties, or that defendant did not know or reasonably should not have known that fact, assault with a deadly weapon is a lesser included offense of assault with a deadly weapon upon a peace officer and must be submitted to the jury. Voluntary intoxication may be considered when a crime requires a further specific intent, such as assault with intent to murder, but it should not be considered in determining assault with a deadly weapon or simple assault.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Sacramento, officers in uniform responded to a reported fight at Maya Ortega’s apartment. During the encounter, Trevor Lane grabbed a kitchen knife and slashed at Officer Nolan Price after testifying that he believed Price had suddenly lunged at him in anger after the argument had already been defused. Trevor was charged only with assault with a deadly weapon on a peace officer, and the trial judge instructed on that offense and simple assault, but not assault with a deadly weapon.

Was the trial judge required to instruct on assault with a deadly weapon as a lesser included offense even without a defense request?

Explanation. The majority held that trial courts must instruct sua sponte on general principles closely and openly connected with the facts, including lesser included offenses supported by the evidence. Where the evidence would allow the jury to find the victim officer was not engaged in the performance of duties, or that the defendant did not know or reasonably should not have known that fact, assault with a deadly weapon is a lesser included offense of assault with a deadly weapon on a peace officer and must be given.