People v. James
California Court of Appeal
62 Cal.App.4th 244, 74 Cal. Rptr. 2d 7 (1998)
- Written by Craig Conway, LLM
Facts
For 10 years, Kathey James (defendant) financially supported four children and two adults living in her mobile home by manufacturing methamphetamine (meth). One afternoon, during the manufacturing process, a volatile chemical caught fire, destroyed the mobile home, and killed three of the children. James was charged with second-degree murder, manufacturing meth, and conspiracy to manufacture meth. At trial, James testified that the manufacturing process had never before resulted in fire or any other incident. Additionally, James testified that she took precautions to ensure that the children were safe, such as by making the meth on a hot plate in a bathroom with the door locked. Although James admitted to using Coleman fuel, red phosphorus, and other hazardous chemicals in the manufacturing process, she denied that the chemicals posed any danger to the people living in the mobile home. However, vapors from the chemicals could be ignited by any ignition source, such as a hot plate or stove. One of the children testified that James was making meth on a stove in the kitchen at the time the fire began. James was convicted on all charges. The jury expressly based the verdicts on second-degree felony murder. James appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Richli, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
