## Facts

- John Cleaves was convicted of second degree murder for the strangulation death of Eaton.
- Cleaves and Eaton discussed Eaton’s AIDS diagnosis, suffering, and Eaton’s desire to die, including a prior suicide attempt.
- A plan was devised in which Eaton would be positioned prone on a bed with a sash around his neck arranged so that Eaton could tighten it by moving his body.
- During the event, the ligature slipped and was reattached.
- Cleaves admitted he applied additional pressure and lay on Eaton to stabilize him while the strangulation proceeded.
- After Eaton died, Cleaves left with some of Eaton’s property and withdrew funds from Eaton’s account pursuant to an arrangement between them.

## Issues

1. Whether the trial court erred by refusing to instruct on aiding and abetting a suicide (Cal. Penal Code § 401) as a lesser related offense to murder.
2. Whether a court should recognize or create a lesser related offense of voluntary manslaughter for a killing done at the victim’s request.
3. Whether the implied malice instruction was erroneous for omitting the phrase “high probability of death.”
4. Whether the trial court erred by failing to instruct on involuntary manslaughter and by failing to give additional instructions on concurrence of act and mental state.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal affirmed the second degree murder conviction.
- No instruction on aiding and abetting a suicide was required because the evidence showed Cleaves’s active participation in causing death, not mere assistance to a self-inflicted act.
- The court declined to create a victim-request (“mercy killing”) voluntary manslaughter category absent legislative authorization.
- The implied malice instruction, viewed as a whole, adequately stated the governing standard.
- Involuntary manslaughter instructions were not warranted on the evidence, and the given instructions sufficiently covered concurrence.

## Legal Principles

- A defendant is entitled to jury instructions on a defense theory only if supported by substantial evidence—evidence from which a reasonable jury could find the facts necessary for the instruction.
- Conduct that constitutes direct, physical participation in causing death is treated as homicide rather than aiding and abetting suicide, even if the decedent desired to die.
- Courts will not create new homicide gradations, including a victim-consent voluntary manslaughter category, where the Penal Code does not provide for it.
- Implied malice focuses on an act dangerous to human life performed with conscious disregard for life; instructions are assessed in their entirety for legal adequacy.
- Involuntary manslaughter instructions are improper where the evidence does not support a non-malice, merely negligent theory of killing; standard instructions may sufficiently convey concurrence of mens rea and act.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed Cleaves’s second degree murder conviction, holding that his admitted physical involvement in the fatal strangulation made the killing homicide rather than assisted suicide, and that no special “mercy killing” manslaughter theory or additional homicide instructions were required on the record.


People v. Cleaves, 229 Cal. App. 3d 367 (Cal. Ct. App. 1991)