People v. Bray
| People v. Bray | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | California Court of Appeals |
| Full case name | The People of the State of California, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. James Eugene Bray, Defendant and Appellant. |
| Decided | October 27, 1975 |
| Citation | 52 Cal. App. 3d 494; 124 Cal. Rptr. 913 |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | Gerald Brown, Richard D. Ault, Martin J. Coughlin[a] |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Brown, joined by Ault, Coughlin |
People v. Bray, 52 Cal. App. 3d 494 (1975), was a case decided by the California Court of Appeal that allowed ignorance of a grading element to be a defense to criminal prosecution.[1]
Factual background
[edit]Defendant Bray was convicted of being a felon in possession of firearms. Bray did possess two concealable firearms, but his status as a felon was unclear. Bray had been convicted in Kansas years earlier of being an accessory after the fact, but even at trial it was unclear if this offense was a felony under Kansas law. Subsequently, when Bray was required to disclose felon status on forms for things like voting, he explained the situation and was allowed to vote in California.[2]
Decision
[edit]The Court of Appeal reversed Bray's conviction, allowing his mistake about his felony status to act as a defense to criminal liability. Under the Model Penal Code, a mistake of criminal law, like one's felony status, is not normally allowed as a defense.[3] Instead the court treated Bray's mistake about his felony status, a grading element in the statute under which he was charged, as a mistake of fact that was an appropriate defense.[4]
See also
[edit]Notes
[edit]- ^ Retired; sitting under appointment
References
[edit]External links
[edit]Text of People v. Bray (1975) is available from: Google Scholar Justia