Opinion ID: 2634388
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Alleged Failure to Charge First Degree Murder

Text: In counts 1 and 2, the information charged that defendant committed the crime of MURDER, in violation of PENAL CODE SECTION 187(A) by murdering] Elmer and Gladys willfully, unlawfully, and with malice aforethought. Defendant asserts the reference to section 187 and the description of the crime in these counts establish that [he] was charged exclusively with second degree malice murder in violation of section 187, not with first degree murder in violation of section 189. According to defendant, because the information did not charge first degree murder and did not allege the facts necessary to establish first degree murder, the trial court exceeded its jurisdiction in instructing the jury on first degree murder. Defendant also maintains the error violated his constitutional rights to due process, a jury determination on every element of the charged crime, adequate notice of the charges against him, and a fair and equitable guilt trial. In several cases, we have rejected identical claims. (E.g. People v. Carey (2007) 41 Cal.4th 109, 131-132, 59 Cal.Rptr.3d 172, 158 P.3d 743; Geier, supra, 41 Cal.4th at pp. 591-592, 61 Cal.Rptr.3d 580, 161 P.3d 104; People v. Hughes, supra, 27 Cal.4th at pp. 368-370, 116 Cal.Rptr.2d 401, 39 P.3d 432.) Given that each murder count charged that defendant committed the murders while engaged in the commission of the crime of robbery, and that section 189 specifies that such murders are in the first degree, defendant offers no persuasive reason for reaching a different conclusion here.