People v. Berry
Supreme Court of California
134 Cal. Rptr. 415 (1976)
At the time of this case, § 192 of the California Penal Code defined voluntary manslaughter as “the unlawful killing of a human being, without malice… upon a sudden quarrel or heat of passion.” Three days after marrying Berry (defendant), Rachel went by herself to her native Israel, where she spent over a month, returning on July 23, 1974. Rachel informed Berry upon her return that she had fallen in love and shared sexual encounters with a man named Yako, and wanted a divorce. An argument ensued which escalated into mutual physical violence, but the couple continued to live together nonetheless. Rachel proceeded to taunt Berry over a subsequent two-week period, claiming she could be pregnant with Yako’s child and showing Berry pictures of them together, while at the same time routinely demanding sex from Berry and indicating a desire to continue their relationship. On July 22, after returning home from a romantic outing, Rachel and Berry got in bed, where she said that she had planned on having sex with him that night, but decided instead to save herself for Yako. Berry then got up to leave, Rachel began screaming at him, and he choked her into unconsciousness. Berry called a taxi to take his wife to the hospital and left the apartment. Rachel was interviewed by a police officer at the hospital, and a warrant was issued for Berry’s arrest. Rachel called Berry and told him about the warrant. When the two met the next day at their apartment, they had a brief verbal exchange and Rachel began screaming. They struggled as Berry unsuccessfully tried to silence her until he strangled her with a telephone chord. Berry was charged with murder. At Berry’s trial, Dr. Blinder, a doctor and psychiatrist appearing as a defense witness, testified that Rachel was suicidal and that her taunting of Berry was an unconscious attempt to provoke him into killing her. When he did so, he was in a state of uncontrollable rage, influenced only by passion. The trial court refused Berry’s request to instruct the jury on voluntary manslaughter. Berry was convicted of murder and appealed his conviction to the Supreme Court of California.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Sullivan, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 166,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,800 briefs, keyed to 187 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.