Opinion ID: 1153591
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Asserted Errors in Instructions

Text: (3) Defendant contends that the court erred in instructing the jury that It is not necessary that all jurors agree in the determination that there was a deliberate and premeditated design to take the life of the deceased, or in the conclusion that the defendant was at the time engaged in the commission of robbery, or an attempt to commit one; it is sufficient that each juror is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the crime of murder in the first degree as that offense is defined. Defendant cites no authority supporting his contention, and we are not persuaded that we should depart from our prior decisions which support the giving of the instruction. In People v. Nye, 63 Cal.2d 166 [45 Cal. Rptr. 328, 403 P.2d 736] [cert. den. 384 U.S. 1026, 1027 (16 L.Ed.2d 1033, 86 S.Ct. 1960)] this court reaffirmed its holding in People v. Chavez, 37 Cal.2d 656, 670-672 [234 P.2d 632], that in a prosecution for first degree murder it is not necessary that all jurors agree on one or more of several theories proposed by the prosecution; it is sufficient that each juror is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of first degree murder as that offense is defined by the statute. (See also People v. Hardenbrook, 48 Cal.2d 345, 353-354 [309 P.2d 424].) A similar rule has been applied in burglary cases ( People v. Failla, 64 Cal.2d 560, 569 [57 Cal. Rptr. 103, 414 P.2d 39]) and theft cases ( People v. Nor Woods, 37 Cal.2d 584, 586 [233 P.2d 897]; People v. Kagan, 264 Cal. App.2d 648, 661 [70 Cal. Rptr. 732] [cert. den. 394 U.S. 911 (22 L.Ed.2d 224, 89 S.Ct. 1027)]; People v. Caldwell, 55 Cal. App.2d 238, 255-256 [130 P.2d 495].) Defendant further contends that instructions on the felony-murder rule should not have been given because, he asserts, the killing and robbery of Burney did not constitute one continuous transaction. He argues that the robbery was completed after the cab was parked at the curb ... for at that point ... Burney gave the defendant his wallet and keys and that the killing was separated in time and place from the robbery. However, the crime of robbery is not confined to the act of taking property from victims. The nature of the crime is such that a robber's escape with his loot is just as important to the execution of the crime as obtaining possession of the loot in the first place. Thus, the crime of robbery is not complete until the robber has won his way to a place of temporary safety. ( People v. Anderson, 64 Cal.2d 633, 638 ...; People v. Ketchel, 59 Cal.2d 503, 523-524....) ( People v. Carroll, 1 Cal.3d 581, 585 [83 Cal. Rptr. 176, 463 P.2d 400].) (4) Here the jury was warranted in concluding that defendant had not won a place of temporary safety when he shot Burney. Accordingly, the court did not err in giving instructions on the felony-murder rule. (See People v. Salas, supra, 7 Cal.3d 812, 820-824; People v. Ketchel, supra [disapproved and judgment vacated on other grounds in People v. Morse, supra, 60 Cal.2d 631, and People v. Ketchel, 63 Cal.2d 859 [48 Cal. Rptr. 614, 409 P.2d 694]]; People v. Kendrick, 56 Cal.2d 71, 89-90 [14 Cal. Rptr. 13, 363 P.2d 13]; People v. Chapman, 261 Cal. App.2d 149, 175 [67 Cal. Rptr. 601].)