Trial court erred by modifying the heat of passion instruction (CALCRIM 570) to add a sentence suggesting that a voluntary manslaughter verdict is appropriate only if defendant “unintentionally” killed the victim. The added language was intended to conform to precedent holding that reckless disregard murder committed in the heat of passion is a cognizable theory of voluntary manslaughter, but the wording here improperly conveyed that only accidental killings qualify. Given that the defendant’s testimony, if believed, supported finding “textbook reckless homicide” committed in the heat of passion, the murder conviction was reversed.

The full opinion is available on the court’s website here: https://www4.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/B338493.PDF