In People v. Brooks (1986) 185 Cal. App. 3d 687, the defendant's brother was stabbed to death. During the police investigation, Thurman Todd was placed in a police car for questioning. Within an hour of the stabbing, the defendant obtained police permission to speak with Todd, although the defendant was extremely upset. Defendant shot the man suspected of stabbing defendant's brother. The shooting occurred about two hours after the stabbing. Todd told the defendant that another man had killed his brother. The defendant walked away to talk to other people for a few minutes and then ran into the police car to attack Todd. They were separated. (Id. at pp. 691-692.) An hour or two later, the defendant encountered Todd on the street after Todd was released by the police. A loud argument erupted and the defendant shot Todd to death. (Id. at p. 690.) On appeal, defendant's murder conviction was reversed because the jury was not instructed on voluntary manslaughter. Brooks stated, "We conclude that the disclosure of information that the victim murdered a family member of the defendant is legally adequate provocation for voluntary manslaughter." (Id. at p. 694.) The court also found that the fact that two hours passed between the act and killing did not mean that defendant could not have acted in a heat of passion. (Id. at p. 695.) Brooks concluded, "Where either the prosecution evidence or evidence presented by the defendant is sufficient to raise a reasonable doubt as to whether the killing was malicious, the prosecution bears the burden of persuading the jury as to the defendant's actual mental state. " (Id. at p. 696.)