CALCRIM No. 561

[The defendant is charged [in Count] with <insert

underlying crime>.] The defendant is [also] charged [in Count]

with murder. A person can be guilty of murder under the provocative act

doctrine even if someone else did the actual killing.

To prove that the defendant is guilty of murder under the provocative

act doctrine, the People must prove that:

1. The defendant was an accomplice of <insert name[s]

or description[s] of alleged provocateur[s]> in (committing/ [or]

attempting to commit) <insert underlying crime>;

2. In (committing/ [or] attempting to commit) <insert

underlying crime>, <insert name[s] or description[s]

of alleged provocateur[s]> intentionally did a provocative act;

3. The defendant knew that the natural and probable consequences

of the provocative act were dangerous to human life and then

acted with conscious disregard for life;

4. In response to ’s <insert name[s] or description[s] of

alleged provocateur[s]> provocative act, <insert name

or description of third party> killed <insert name of

decedent>;

AND

5. ’s <insert name of decedent> death was the natural

and probable consequence of ’s <insert name[s] or

description[s] of alleged provocateur[s]> provocative act.

A provocative act is an act:

1. [That goes beyond what is necessary to accomplish the

<insert underlying crime>;]

[AND

2.] Whose natural and probable consequences are dangerous to

human life, because there is a high probability that the act will

provoke a deadly response.

An act is dangerous to human life if it involved a high degree of

probability that it would result in death.

The defendant is an accomplice of <insert name[s] or

description[s] of alleged provocateur[s]> if the defendant is subject to

prosecution for the identical offense that you conclude

<insert name[s] or description[s] of alleged provocateur[s]> (committed/

[or] attempted to commit). The defendant is subject to prosecution if (he/

she) (committed/ [or] attempted to commit) the crime or if:

1. (He/She) knew of ’s <insert name[s] or description[s]

of alleged provocateur[s]> criminal purpose to commit

<insert underlying crime>;

AND

2. The defendant intended to, and did in fact, (aid, facilitate,

promote, encourage, or instigate the commission of

<insert underlying crime>/ [or] participate in a criminal

conspiracy to commit <insert underlying crime>).

[An accomplice does not need to be present when the crime is

committed. On the other hand, a person is not an accomplice just

because he or she is at the scene of a crime, even if he or she knows that

a crime [will be committed or] is being committed and does nothing to

stop it.]

In order to prove that ’s <insert name of decedent> death

was the natural and probable consequence of ’s <insert

name[s] or description[s] of alleged provocateur[s]> provocative act, the

People must prove that:

1. A reasonable person in ’s <insert name[s] or

description[s] of alleged provocateur[s]> position would have

foreseen that there was a high probability that (his/her/their) act

could begin a chain of events resulting in someone’s death;

2. ’s <insert name[s] or description[s] of alleged

provocateur[s]> act was a direct and substantial factor in causing

’s <insert name of decedent> death;

AND

3. ’s <insert name or description of decedent> death

would not have happened if <insert name[s] or

description[s] of alleged provocateur[s]> had not committed the

provocative act.

A substantial factor is more than a trivial or remote factor. However, it

does not need to be the only factor that caused the death.

<Multiple Provocative Acts>

[The People alleged the following provocative acts: <insert

acts alleged>. Y ou may not find the defendant guilty unless you all agree

that the People have proved that:

1. <insert name[s] or description[s] of alleged

provocateur[s]> committed at least one provocative act;

CALCRIM No. 561 HOMICIDE

AND

2. At least one of the provocative acts committed by

<insert name[s] or description[s] of alleged provocateur[s]> was a

direct and substantial factor that caused the killing.

However, you do not all need to agree on which provocative act has been

proved.]

<Accomplice Deceased>

[If you decide that the only provocative act that caused ’s

<insert name of deceased accomplice> death was committed by

<insert name of deceased accomplice>, then the defendant is

not guilty of ’s <insert name of deceased accomplice>

murder.]

<Independent Criminal Act>

[A defendant is not guilty of murder if the killing of <insert

name or description of decedent> was caused solely by the independent

criminal act of someone other than the defendant or <insert

name[s] or description[s] of all alleged accomplice[s]>. An independent

criminal act is a free, deliberate, and informed criminal act by a person

who is not acting with the defendant.]

<Degree of Murder>

[If you decide that the defendant is guilty of murder, you must decide

whether the murder is first or second degree.

To prove that the defendant is guilty of first degree murder, the People

must prove that:

1. As a result of ’s <insert name[s] or description[s] of

alleged provocateur[s]> provocative act, <insert name

of decedent> was killed while <insert name[s] or

description[s] of alleged provocateur[s]> (was/were) committing

<insert Pen. Code, § 189 felony>;

AND

2. <insert name[s] or description[s] of alleged

provocateur[s]> specifically intended to commit ___________

<insert Pen. Code, § 189 felony> when (he/she/they) did the

provocative act.

In deciding whether <insert name[s] or description[s] of

alleged provocateur[s]> intended to commit <insert Pen.

Code, § 189 felony> and whether the death occurred during the

commission of <insert Pen. Code, § 189 felony>, you should

refer to the instructions I have given you on <insert Pen.

Code, § 189 felony>.

HOMICIDE CALCRIM No. 561

Any murder that does not meet these requirements for first degree

murder is second degree murder.]

[If you decide that the defendant committed murder, that crime is

murder in the second degree.]

New January 2006; Revised August 2014, September 2019, February 2026