CALCRIM No. 2180. Evading Peace Officer: Death or Serious Bodily Injury (Veh. Code, §§ 2800.1(a), 2800.3(a), (b))

Judicial Council of California Criminal Jury Instructions (2024 edition)

Download PDF
2180.Evading Peace Officer: Death or Serious Bodily Injury (Veh.
Code, §§ 2800.1(a), 2800.3(a), (b))
The defendant is charged [in Count ] with evading a peace officer
and causing (death/ [or] serious bodily injury) [in violation of
<insert appropriate code section[s]>].
To prove that the defendant is guilty of this crime, the People must
prove that:
1. A peace officer in a vehicle was pursuing the defendant, who was
also driving a vehicle;
2. The defendant intended to evade the peace officer;
3. While driving, the defendant willfully fled from, or tried to elude,
the pursuing peace officer;
4. The defendant’s attempt to flee from, or elude, the pursuing
peace officer caused (the death of/ [or] serious bodily injury to)
someone else;
5. All of the following were true:
(a) There was at least one lighted red lamp visible from the front
of the peace officer’s vehicle;
(b) The defendant either saw or reasonably should have seen the
(c) The peace officer’s vehicle was sounding a siren as reasonably
(d) The peace officer’s vehicle was distinctively marked;
(e) The peace officer was wearing a distinctive uniform.
[A person employed as a police officer by <insert name of
agency that employs police offıcer> is a peace officer.]
[A person employed by <insert name of agency that employs
peace offıcer, e.g., “the Department of Fish and Wildlife”> is a peace officer
if <insert description of facts necessary to make employee a
peace offıcer, e.g, “designated by the director of the agency as a peace
Someone commits an act willfully when he or she does it willingly or on
purpose. It is not required that he or she intend to break the law, hurt
someone else, or gain any advantage.
[A serious bodily injury means a serious impairment of physical
condition. Such an injury may include[, but is not limited to]: (loss of
consciousness/ concussion/ bone fracture/ protracted loss or impairment
of function of any bodily member or organ/ a wound requiring extensive
suturing/ [and] serious disfigurement).]
A vehicle is distinctively marked if it has features that are reasonably
noticeable to other drivers, including a red lamp, siren, and at least one
other feature that makes it look different from vehicles that are not used
for law enforcement purposes.
Adistinctive uniform means clothing adopted by a law enforcement
agency to identify or distinguish members of its force. The uniform does
not have to be complete or of any particular level of formality. However,
a badge, without more, is not enough.
[An act causes (death/ [or] serious bodily injury) if the (death/ [or]
injury) is the direct, natural, and probable consequence of the act and
the (death/ [or] injury) would not have happened without the act. A
natural and probable consequence is one that a reasonable person would
know is likely to happen if nothing unusual intervenes. In deciding
whether a consequence is natural and probable, consider all the
circumstances established by the evidence.]
[There may be more than one cause of (death/ [or] serious bodily
injury). An act causes (death/ [or] injury) only if it is a substantial factor
in causing the (death/ [or] injury). A substantial factor is more than a
trivial or remote factor. However, it need not be the only factor that
causes the (death/ [or] injury).]
New January 2006; Revised August 2006
Instructional Duty
The court has a sua sponte duty to give this instruction defining the elements of the
If causation is at issue, the court has a sua sponte duty to instruct on proximate
cause. (People v. Bernhardt (1963) 222 Cal.App.2d 567, 590-591 [35 Cal.Rptr.
401].) If the evidence indicates that there was only one cause of death or injury, the
court should give the “direct, natural, and probable” language in the first bracketed
paragraph on causation. If there is evidence of multiple causes of death or injury,
the court should also give the “substantial factor” instruction in the second
bracketed paragraph on causation. (See People v. Autry (1995) 37 Cal.App.4th 351,
363 [43 Cal.Rptr.2d 135]; People v. Pike (1988) 197 Cal.App.3d 732, 746-747 [243
Cal.Rptr. 54].)
The jury must determine whether a peace officer was pursuing the defendant.
(People v. Flood (1998) 18 Cal.4th 470, 482 [76 Cal.Rptr.2d 180, 957 P.2d 869].)
The court must instruct the jury on the appropriate definition of “peace officer” from
the statute. (Ibid.) It is an error for the court to instruct that the witness is a peace
officer as a matter of law. (Ibid. [instruction that “Officer Bridgeman and Officer
Gurney are peace officers” was error].) If the witness is a police officer, give the
bracketed sentence that begins with “A person employed as a police officer.” If the
witness is another type of peace officer, give the bracketed sentence that begins with
“A person employed by.”
On request, the court must give CALCRIM No. 3426, Voluntary Intoxication, if
there is sufficient evidence of voluntary intoxication to negate the intent to evade.
(People v. Finney (1980) 110 Cal.App.3d 705, 712 [168 Cal.Rptr. 80].)
On request, give CALCRIM No. 2241, Driver and Driving Defined.
Elements. Veh. Code, §§ 2800.1(a), 2800.3(a), (b).
Serious Bodily Injury Defined. Pen. Code, § 243(f)(4); People v. Taylor (2004)
118 Cal.App.4th 11, 25, fn. 4 [12 Cal.Rptr.3d 693].
Distinctively Marked Vehicle. People v. Hudson (2006) 38 Cal.4th 1002,
1010-1011 [44 Cal.Rptr.3d 632, 136 P.3d 168].
Distinctive Uniform. People v. Estrella (1995) 31 Cal.App.4th 716, 724 [37
Cal.Rptr.2d 383]; People v. Mathews (1998) 64 Cal.App.4th 485, 491 [75
Cal.Rptr.2d 289].
Jury Must Determine If Peace Officers. People v. Flood (1998) 18 Cal.4th 470,
482 [76 Cal.Rptr.2d 180, 957 P.2d 869].
Red Lamp, Siren, Additional Distinctive Feature of Car, and Distinctive Uniform
Must Be Proved. People v. Hudson (2006) 38 Cal.4th 1002, 1013 [44
Cal.Rptr.3d 632, 136 P.3d 168]; People v. Acevedo (2003) 105 Cal.App.4th 195,
199 [129 Cal.Rptr.2d 270]; People v. Brown (1989) 216 Cal.App.3d 596,
599-600 [264 Cal.Rptr. 908].
Misdemeanor Evading a Pursuing Peace Officer. Veh. Code, § 2800.1; People v.
Springfield (1993) 13 Cal.App.4th 1674, 1680-1681 [17 Cal.Rptr.2d 278].
Not Inherently Dangerous Felony
Vehicle Code section 2800.3 is not an inherently dangerous felony and does not
support a felony-murder conviction. (People v. Jones (2000) 82 Cal.App.4th 663,
668-669 [98 Cal.Rptr.2d 724]; People v. Sanchez (2001) 86 Cal.App.4th 970, 974
[103 Cal.Rptr.2d 809].)
See the Related Issues section to CALCRIM No. 2182, Evading Peace Offıcer:
2 Witkin & Epstein, California Criminal Law (4th ed. 2012) Crimes Against Public
Peace and Welfare, § 328, 329.
3 Millman, Sevilla & Tarlow, California Criminal Defense Practice, Ch. 63, Double
Jeopardy, § 63.21[2][a] (Matthew Bender).
5 Millman, Sevilla & Tarlow, California Criminal Defense Practice, Ch. 91,
Sentencing, §§ 91.22[1][a][iv], 91.60[2][b][i], [ii], 91.81[1][d], [8] (Matthew
6 Millman, Sevilla & Tarlow, California Criminal Defense Practice, Ch. 142, Crimes
Against the Person, §§ 142.01[2][b][ii][B], 142.02[2][c], [3][c] (Matthew Bender).

© Judicial Council of California.