For purposes of this essay option, Write a formal essay paper addressing the specific questions presented
for discussion therein, showing that you have researched the required assignments and studied them,
including the following case: People v. Anderson, 70 Cal.2d 15 (1968).pdf. In that matter the California
Supreme Court reviewed a first-degree murder conviction and death sentence of a defendant who had killed a
ten-year old girl, the daughter of a Mrs. Hammond with whom he had been living for about eight months.
This appeal reviewed the trial court’s second conviction and death sentence upon retrial after the same
California Supreme Court reversed the earlier conviction because it had been predicated upon a jury finding
that the murder was committed in the course of the commission of raping the victim, an enumerated felony
under the legislatively defined felony murder rule. The evidence that the defendant had, at the time of killing
the girl, the specific intent to commit rape, was obtained by police as a result of denying the defendant a
requested attorney, and therefore had been erroneously admitted on the trial in violation of the intervening
U.S. Supreme Court decision in Escobedo v. Illinois (1964). Consider in your essay whether the defendant’s
second murder conviction and death sentence might have been upheld, had the interrogating officers that
interviewed the defendant at the police station after his arrest not violated the defendant’s right to counsel, but
obtained incriminating testimony in a manner not offending the defendant’s constitutional rights. Be sure to
see [read in particular the transcript quoted in
footnote 4 (fn. 4, infra) — FN 4. The record discloses the following colloquy between defendant and the
interrogating police officers, prior to the time defendant gave his incriminating admissions: …]
In preparing your essay, YOU MUST APPLY the California Supreme Court’s rule distinguishing firstdegree from lesser degrees of murder, as announced on page four of our reading assignment (People v.
Anderson, 70 Cal.2d 15 (1968).pdf), which was the defendant’s second appeal before the California Supreme
Court. On page four of the opinion (in my Adobe version of the text), the Court stated: “The type of evidence
which this court has found sufficient to sustain a finding of premeditation and deliberation falls into three
basic categories: (1) facts about how and what defendant did prior to the actual killing which show that the
defendant was engaged in activity directed toward, and explicable as intended to result in, the killing–what
may [cite] be characterized as ‘planning’ activity; (2) facts about the defendant’s prior relationship and/or
conduct with the victim from which the jury could reasonably infer a ‘motive’ to kill the victim, which
inference of motive, together with facts of type (1) or (3), would in turn support an inference that the killing
was the result of ‘a pre-existing reflection’ and ‘careful thought and weighing of considerations’ rather than
‘mere unconsidered or rash impulse hastily executed’ (cite); (3) facts about the nature of the killing from which
the jury could infer that the manner of killing was so particular and exacting that the defendant must have
intentionally killed according to a ‘preconceived design’ to take his victim’s life in a particular way for a
‘reason’ which the jury can reasonably infer from facts of type (1) or (2). Analysis of the cases will show that
this court sustains verdicts of first-degree murder typically when there is evidence of all three types and
otherwise requires at least extremely strong evidence of (1) or evidence of (2) in conjunction with either (1) or
(3).” You can augment or intensify your individual research, elaborate
or embellish your points, and demonstrate, informal essay paper style, the reasoning, and argumentation
that led you to certain conclusions that you may have posted in our Discussion Forum for Week Seven.

"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"