People v. Newton
California Court of Appeal
8 Cal. App. 3d 359, 87 Cal. Rptr. 394 (1970)
- Written by Jamie Milne, JD
Facts
Police officers John Frey and Herbert Heanes stopped a vehicle driven by Huey Newton (defendant). Frey informed Newton that he was under arrest and ordered him to exit the vehicle. Upon doing so, Newton briskly walked down the street toward the back of the parked police cars, with Frey following close behind. A street altercation ensued, the facts of which were disputed. Evidence suggested that Frey and Newton engaged in a physical struggle over a gun. Hearing a gunshot, Heanes fired a shot at Newton. More gunfire ensued. In the course of events, Heanes was shot twice, Frey five times, and Newton once in the abdomen. When other officers arrived, Newton and his passenger had fled, and Frey’s gun was missing. Frey died before reaching the hospital, and Heanes suffered injuries. Newton was charged with murdering Frey and assaulting Heanes with a deadly weapon, among other things. At trial, Newton testified that he had not been carrying a gun. Further, Newton claimed that Frey had struck him in the face, causing him to stumble backward. Newton then heard an explosion and felt a boiling sensation in his stomach. After that, he remembered nothing other than vague gunfire and a crawling sensation. He claimed that he arrived at a hospital with no knowledge of how he got there, having been unconscious or semiconscious in the interim. A doctor testified that Newton’s recollections were compatible with the injury he received. The doctor testified that it was common for a person to go into a reflex shock condition causing loss of consciousness for short periods following a gunshot wound to the abdomen. The trial judge instructed the jury on diminished capacity, but not unconsciousness, believing Newton to have withdrawn his request for an unconsciousness instruction. Newton was acquitted of the assault charge but was convicted of voluntary manslaughter, a lesser included offense to murder, as to Frey. Newton appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Rattigan, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 798,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 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.