In Re v.v.

51 Cal. App. 4th 1020 (2011)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

V.V. and J.H. (both 17) joined a friend. V.V. lit a large firecracker. J.H. threw it onto the brush-covered hillside. It caused a five-acre brush fire. Abel Ramirez, a resident, heard a loud explosion, saw smoke rising from the hillside and saw flames several minutes later. Ramirez then saw three young men running down the hill from the fire‘s point of origin. Ramirez identified V.V. and J.H. as two of the three young men running down the hill. Pasadena police officers responded to the 911 calls. They saw three people matching the description of the suspects and detained them. They found a lighter V.V. and a cherry bomb. V.V. declared, 'That‘s what caused the fire.' V.V. admitted that he had caused the brush fire by setting off a firecracker on the hillside. J.H.‘s fingers had what appeared to be gunpowder from fireworks on them. The fire burned five acres of brush-covered hillside. V.V. and J.H. admitted that they had been playing with firecrackers and had set the hillside on fire. The third minor did not want to participate in lighting the firecrackers because he feared that someone might get injured. The minors stated that J.H. held the firecracker, V.V. lit it with J.H.‘s lighter, and J.H. threw it. V.V. said they tried to throw the firecracker onto a green area on the hillside. J.H. said he was going to throw the firecracker onto a concrete area. V.V. said that he did not think the green areas on the hillside would ignite and that he just wanted to make some noise. The State charged that V.V. and J.H. committed the crimes of arson of a forest land and recklessly causing a fire. Both were found guilty and appealed. The court found that V.V. and J.H. understood what they were doing and that they knew the natural consequence could be setting the hill on fire. It also found that V.V. and J.H. did not intend to set the hill on fire. But, because they intentionally ignited and threw the firecracker the requisite mental state for arson was met. Ds appealed, and two different courts affirmed the convictions. The California Supreme Court granted certiorari. Ds argue that there is insufficient evidence of malice because they lit and threw the firecracker without intent to cause a fire or any other harm.