CALCRIM No. 522. Provocation: Effect on Degree of Murder

Judicial Council of California Criminal Jury Instructions (2022 edition)

Download PDF
Bg14d
522.Provocation: Effect on Degree of Murder
Provocation may reduce a murder from first degree to second degree
[and may reduce a murder to manslaughter]. The weight and
significance of the provocation, if any, are for you to decide.
If you conclude that the defendant committed murder but was provoked,
consider the provocation in deciding whether the crime was first or
second degree murder. [Also, consider the provocation in deciding
whether the defendant committed murder or manslaughter.]
[Provocation does not apply to a prosecution under a theory of felony
murder.]
New January 2006; Revised April 2011, March 2017
BENCH NOTES
Instructional Duty
Provocation may reduce murder from first to second degree. (People v. Thomas
(1945) 25 Cal.2d 880, 903 [156 P.2d 7] [provocation raised reasonable doubt about
premeditation or deliberation, “leaving the homicide as murder of the second degree;
i.e., an unlawful killing perpetrated with malice aforethought but without
premeditation and deliberation”]; see also People v. Cole (2004) 33 Cal.4th 1158,
1211-1212 [17 Cal.Rptr.3d 532, 95 P.3d 811] [court adequately instructed on
relevance of provocation to whether defendant acted with intent to torture for torture
murder].) There is, however, no sua sponte duty to instruct the jury on this issue.
(People v. Rogers (2006) 39 Cal.4th 826, 877-880 [48 Cal.Rptr.3d 1, 141 P.3d
135].) This is a pinpoint instruction, to be given on request.
This instruction may be given after CALCRIM No. 521, First Degree Murder.
If the court will be instructing on voluntary manslaughter, give both bracketed
portions on manslaughter.
If the court will be instructing on felony murder, give the bracketed sentence stating
that provocation does not apply to felony murder.
AUTHORITY
Provocation Reduces From First to Second Degree. People v. Thomas (1945)
25 Cal.2d 880, 903 [156 P.2d 7]; see also People v. Cole (2004) 33 Cal.4th
1158, 1211-1212 [17 Cal.Rptr.3d 532, 95 P.3d 811].
Pinpoint Instruction. People v. Rogers (2006) 39 Cal.4th 826, 877-878 [48
Cal.Rptr.3d 1, 141 P.3d 135].
This Instruction Upheld. People v. Hernandez (2010) 183 Cal.App.4th 1327,
1333-1335 [107 Cal.Rptr.3d 915].
257
Copyright Judicial Council of California
Bg14e
SECONDARY SOURCES
3 Millman, Sevilla & Tarlow, California Criminal Defense Practice, Ch. 73,
Defenses and Justifications, § 73.16 (Matthew Bender).
4 Millman, Sevilla & Tarlow, California Criminal Defense Practice, Ch. 85,
Submission to Jury and Verdict, § 85.04[1][c] (Matthew Bender).
6 Millman, Sevilla & Tarlow, California Criminal Defense Practice, Ch. 142, Crimes
Against the Person, §§ 142.01, 142.02 (Matthew Bender).
CALCRIM No. 522 HOMICIDE
258
Copyright Judicial Council of California

© Judicial Council of California.