CALCRIM No. 627. Hallucination: Effect on Premeditation
Judicial Council of California Criminal Jury Instructions (2023 edition)Download PDF
627.Hallucination: Effect on Premeditation
A hallucination is a perception not based on objective reality. In other
words, a person has a hallucination when that person believes that he or
she is seeing or hearing [or otherwise perceiving] something that is not
actually present or happening.
You may consider evidence of hallucinations, if any, in deciding whether
the defendant acted with deliberation and premeditation.
The People have the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that
the defendant acted with deliberation and premeditation. If the People
have not met this burden, you must find the defendant not guilty of first
New January 2006; Revised February 2015, September 2017
This is a pinpoint instruction to be given only on request when the evidence
supports the defense theory. (People v. McCarrick (2016) 6 Cal.App.5th 227, 243
[210 Cal.Rptr.3d 838].) The court may need to modify this instruction if evidence of
delusions, rather than hallucinations, is offered. (People v. Gana (2015) 236
Cal.App.4th 598, 605-606 [186 Cal.Rptr.3d 724].)
“[E]vidence of a hallucination - a perception with no objective reality - is
inadmissible to negate malice so as to mitigate murder to voluntary manslaughter
but is admissible to negate deliberation and premeditation so as to reduce first
degree murder to second degree murder.” (People v. Padilla (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th
675, 677 [126 Cal.Rptr.2d 889].)
• Hallucination Evidence. People v. Padilla (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 675, 677 [126
• Hallucination Alone Not a Basis for Imperfect Self-Defense. People v. Mejia-
Lenares (2006) 135 Cal.App.4th 1437 [38 Cal.Rptr.3d 404].
• Imperfect Self-Defense Does Not Apply When Defendant’s Belief in Need for
Self-Defense is Entirely Delusional. People v. Elmore (2014) 59 Cal.4th 121,
145 [172 Cal.Rptr.3d 413, 325 P.3d 951].
1 Witkin & Epstein, California Criminal Law (4th ed. 2012) Crimes Against the
Person, §§ 107-108.
3 Millman, Sevilla & Tarlow, California Criminal Defense Practice, Ch. 73,
Defenses and Justifications, § 73.03 (Matthew Bender).
6 Millman, Sevilla & Tarlow, California Criminal Defense Practice, Ch. 142, Crimes
Against the Person, § 142.01[g] (Matthew Bender).
628-639. Reserved for Future Use
CALCRIM No. 627 HOMICIDE