People v Luis Jiminez
People v. Luis Jiminez (decided November 17, 2022)
Questions Presented: When is a prosecutor required to instruct the grand jury on a
“choice of evils” justification defense? Do Court of Appeals judges care more about
dogs than people?
Holding: Pretty unhelpful (but limited to very case-specific facts, at least!)
CAL Observes: A dog bit Mr. Jiminez in the leg. Mr. Jiminez, who was at the time
also scuffling with a human person, hit the dog with a broomstick. Mr. Jiminez
testified at the grand jury that he “never intended to hurt the dog” and hit her by
accident. That testimony, the Court of Appeals explained, sunk his argument on
appeal: that the prosecutor should have charged the grand jury with a “choice of
evils” defense. You don’t get that defense, the Court unanimously held, if you don’t
actually make a choice.
This case is most noteworthy for the fact that it refers to Mr. Jiminez as “defendant”
but the dog as “Gigi.”