legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Kanda
Defendant Romesh Chander Kanda appeals from a judgment entered after a jury convicted him of second degree murder and assault with a firearm and further found that he personally used a handgun during the commission of both offenses. (Pen. Code, 187, 245, subd. (a)(2), 12022.5, subd. (a).) On appeal, he claims the court gave erroneous instructions on how to determine the sufficiency of provocation for the purpose of voluntary manslaughter under a heat of passion theory. He also claims the prosecutor was guilty of misconduct in arguing an erroneous standard for determining the sufficiency of provocation. Court find instructional error that compels reversal of the murder conviction.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale