Appeals Court Reverses Gun Conviction In Kate Steinle Killing

Here is a legal matter that largely will be misconstrued and exploited in the immigration debate — and already is being exploited for political reasons.

News came out late yesterday (here and here) that a California state appeals court threw out the sole conviction against an immigrant who fatally shot a young woman on the San Francisco waterfront in 2015 in a case that sparked a national immigration debate.

Here is the court’s unpublished opinion, which begins as follows:

“This appeal arises from circumstances resulting in the tragic death of a young woman. While walking on a crowded San Francisco pier early on a summer evening with her father and a family friend, Kate Steinle was struck in the back by a bullet and died [in July 2015]. Jose Ines Garcia Zarate, who was holding the gun when it fired the shot that killed Ms. Steinle, was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm after a jury acquitted him of murder, involuntary manslaughter, and assault with a firearm. Defendant’s sole contention on appeal is that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the affirmative defense of momentary possession.”

Garcia-Zarate said he unwittingly picked up the gun used in the shooting and it fired accidentally. The bullet ricocheted off the concrete and fatally struck Steinle, who was with her father and a family friend. Adding to the odd facts, the weapon used in the shooting belonged to a U.S. Bureau of Land Management ranger who reported it stolen from his parked car.

The court overturned the single conviction on a charge of being a felon in possession of a gun. The 1st District Court of Appeal overturned the gun conviction because the judge failed to give the jury the option of acquitting Garcia-Zarate on the theory he only possessed the weapon for a moment. Prosecutors now have the choice of retrying him on the single count.  Garcia-Zarate remains in custody facing related federal charges.

Defense lawyers argued that because Garcia-Zarate held the gun for such a short moment, he couldn’t be convicted of illegal gun possession. Prosecutors argued that the jury instruction error was harmless because Garcia-Zarate admitted firing the gun and experts said he couldn’t do so without pulling the trigger. The court disagreed, saying the jury’s verdict showed they rejected the prosecution theory that the shooting was intentional or even negligent and they had asked the judge to define possession and whether there was a time requirement for possession.

KJ