People v. Contreras - 26 Cal. App. 4th 944, 31 Cal. Rptr. 2d 757 (1994)

Rule:

Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. Cal. Penal Code § 187 (a). Malice is implied when the circumstances attending the killing show an abandoned and malignant heart.

Facts:

A child died as a result of injuries sustained in a traffic collision. The collision occurred when a tow truck driven by defendant, Heriberto Contreras, rear-ended the vehicle in which the child was a passenger. Defendant was charged with second-degree murder. The People presented evidence establishing a pattern of reckless driving by bandit tow truck drivers in general and by defendant in particular. Defendant had received numerous citations for traffic violations, had been arrested for reckless driving, had a prior accident, and actively was racing other tow truck drivers to an accident scene at the time of the fatal collision. Further, the evidence indicated defendant knew the brakes on his tow truck were not functioning properly on the day of the collision. Defendant was convicted of the crime charged. On appeal, defendant contended that an accidental homicide which did not involve a high-speed chase or drug impaired driving could not be classified as murder under California law.

Issue:

Under the circumstances, was the defendant properly charged and convicted of second-degree murder?

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

The court affirmed the judgment of the trial court, because the facts indicated a subjective awareness of the risk created which implied that defendant had acted with malice, thus the charge of murder was proper. The court concluded the evidence indicated defendant knew the brakes were defective at the time of the fatal crash and he drove recklessly anyway. The court held that a jury could rationally conclude the evidence demonstrated a conscious disregard for life. The court ruled that defendant was properly charged and convicted of second-degree murder.