Keeler v. Superior Court
California Supreme Court
2 Cal.3d 619, 87 Cal.Rptr. 481, 470 P.2d 617 (1970)

- Written by Carolyn Strutton, JD
Facts
Robert Keeler (defendant) and his wife, Teresa Keeler, divorced on September 27, 1968. At the time, Teresa was pregnant with another man’s child. On February 23, 1969, Teresa was driving on a narrow road when another car forced her to pull over. Robert came out of the other car and confronted her about her pregnancy. Upon seeing her stomach, Robert became angry and struck her in the stomach with his knee, intending to hit the fetus out of her. After he left, Teresa called for assistance and underwent a caesarean section. The fetus was stillborn, with a skull fracture cited as the cause of death. An investigation showed that the skull fracture could have been due to Robert’s attack to Teresa’s stomach. Evidence at the time showed the fetus was viable on the day of attack. Teresa and her doctor had previously detected fetal movement, and at the time the fetus was stillborn, it weighed five pounds and was 18 inches long. An expert estimated that had the fetus been born prematurely on the date of its death, it would have had a 75 percent to 96 percent chance of surviving. Robert was charged with the murder of the fetus. In California, Penal Code § 187 criminalizes the murder of a “human being.” Robert moved to set aside the information. The lower court denied his motion, and he petitioned for a writ of prohibition from the California Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Mosk, J.)
Dissent (Burke, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.


