People v. Kurtenbach

In People v. Kurtenbach (2012) 204 Cal.App.4th 1264, the Court addressed whether a conviction for vandalism could be sustained when a neighboring home suffered damage caused by a defendant's wrongful act of setting fire to his own property, but there was no evidence the defendant intended to damage the neighboring home. The jury was instructed the "malice" required for vandalism is when the defendant acted by "'intentionally doing a wrongful act or when he or she acted with the unlawful intent to annoy or injure someone else'" (id. at p. 1281), and during deliberations the jury asked (as to the vandalism count) whether the "'"wrongful act" need to be directed towards property not owned by the defendant?'" (Ibid.) The trial court instructed the jury that the wrongful act "'need not be "directed" towards anyone.'" (Ibid.) The defendant asserted that was error, arguing vandalism required the defendant act maliciously toward the victim and therefore the jury should have been instructed the wrongful act needed to be directed toward the victim of the damage. (Ibid.)