Hess Collection Winery v. California Agricultural Labor Relations Board

Defendant, convicted of first degree murder (Pen. Code 187, subd. (a)), contends that there was insufficient evidence to support the verdict. Specifically, he argues that certain elements necessary to support lying-in-wait first degree murder were not supported by sufficient evidence. This argument encompasses the issue of whether a "substantial period of watching and waiting," required for the related lying-in-wait special circumstance, is also required for first degree murder under a lying-in-wait theory. We find, as defendant argues, that a "substantial period of watching and waiting" is required for lying-in-wait first degree murder, but nevertheless conclude that the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict. We affirm the conviction.