People v. Valdez

Summary

The California Supreme Court held that criminal negligence is the appropriate mens rea for felony child endangerment based on indirect infliction of harm under California Penal Code section 273a, subdivision (a). The court rejected the requirement that the defendant have subjective awareness of the danger and reversed the Court of Appeal's judgment.

Holdings

1. Criminal negligence, rather than subjective awareness of the risk, is the appropriate mens rea for felony child endangerment based on indirectly causing or permitting a child to be placed in a dangerous situation.
2. The statutory requirement that the defendant act willfully is not inconsistent with criminal negligence and does not require subjective awareness of the risk.
3. Any failure in the instruction to require willfulness for the permitting theory was harmless because the jury separately found the section 12022.95 enhancement true, which required a finding that Valdez willfully caused or permitted the child's injury or harm resulting in death.

Questions Presented

1. What mens rea applies to felony child endangerment based on indirectly placing or permitting a child to be placed in a dangerous situation under Penal Code section 273a, subdivision (a)?
2. Whether the jury instruction adequately required willfulness and, if not, whether any instructional error was prejudicial.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded