Section 1530 | CALCRIM (Jury Instructions)

[A person does not unlawfully cause a fire if the only thing burned is his
or her own personal property, unless he or she acts with the intent to
defraud, or the fire also injures someone else or someone else’s structure,
forest land, or property.]
[Arson and unlawfully causing a fire require different mental states. For
arson, a person must act willfully and maliciously. For unlawfully
causing a fire, a person must act recklessly.]
New January 2006; Revised September 2020
BENCH NOTES
Instructional Duty
The court has a sua sponte duty to give an instruction defining the elements of the
crime.
If the prosecution’s theory is that the defendant did not set the fire but “caused” the
fire, the court has a sua sponte duty to instruct on aiding and abetting. (People v.
Sarkis (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 23, 28 [272 Cal.Rptr. 34].) See CALCRIM Nos.
400–403.
Depending upon the theory of recklessness the prosecutor is alleging, the court
should instruct with alternative A or B.
If the defendant is also charged with arson, the court may wish to give the last
bracketed paragraph, which explains the difference in intent between unlawfully
causing a fire and arson. (People v. Hooper (1986) 181 Cal.App.3d 1174, 1182 [226
Cal.Rptr. 810], disapproved of in People v. Barton (1995) 12 Cal.4th 186 [47
Cal.Rptr.2d 569, 906 P.2d 531] on the point that defense counsel’s objection to
instruction on lesser included offense constituted invited error; People v. Schwartz
(1992) 2 Cal.App.4th 1319, 1324 [3 Cal.Rptr.2d 816].)
The second sentence of the great bodily injury definition could result in error if the
prosecution improperly argues great bodily injury may be shown by greater than
minor injury alone. (Compare People v. Medellin (2020) 45 Cal.App.5th 519,
533–535 [258 Cal.Rptr.3d 867] [the definition was reasonably susceptible to
prosecutor’s erroneous argument that the injury need only be greater than minor]
with People v. Quinonez (2020) 46 Cal.App.5th 457, 466 [260 Cal.Rptr.3d 86]
[upholding instructions containing great bodily injury definition as written].)
AUTHORITY
•
Elements. Pen. Code, § 452.
•
Great Bodily Injury. Pen. Code, § 12022.7(f).
•
Structure, Forest Land Defined. Pen. Code, § 450.
•
Difference Between This Crime and Arson. People v. Hooper (1986) 181
Cal.App.3d 1174, 1182 [226 Cal.Rptr. 810].
•
To Burn Defined. People v. Haggerty (1873) 46 Cal. 354, 355; In re Jesse L.
CALCRIM No. 1530
ARSON
1092

New January 2006
BENCH NOTES
Instructional Duty
The court has a sua sponte duty to give an instruction defining the elements of the
crime.
If the prosecution’s theory is that the defendant did not set the fire but “caused” the
fire, the court has a sua sponte duty to instruct on aiding and abetting. (People v.
Sarkis (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 23, 28 [272 Cal.Rptr. 34].) See CALCRIM Nos.
400–403.
Depending upon the theory of recklessness the prosecutor is alleging, the court
should instruct with alternative A or B.
If the defendant is also charged with arson, the court may wish to gi