P. v. Pulido
On August 14, 2004, appellant Marina Yvette Pulido was driving a car on a public street. Her husband, Mike Pulido, Sr., was riding on the cars hood. Mike lost his balance and fell onto the street, sustaining a fatal brain injury.
Appellant was convicted after jury trial of misdemeanor manslaughter without gross negligence as a lesser included offense to the crime of vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence, as charged in count II of the information. (Pen. Code, 192, subd. (c)(2).)[2] She was acquitted of voluntary manslaughter and assault with a deadly weapon, as charged in counts I and III of the information. Appellant was placed on court probation for 36 months and ordered to serve 90 days in jail as a condition of probation.
Although the jury was instructed on self-defense, appellant argues that the trial court erred by failing to instruct, sua sponte, on the related defense of lawfully resisting the commission of a public offense. ( 692.) Alternatively, she argues that defense counsel was deficient because he did not request instruction on this defense. Appellant also challenges admission of expert testimony that zero miles per hour is the safe speed to drive a vehicle when a person is on the hood. None of appellants arguments are convincing; Court affirm.
Comments on P. v. Pulido