PC 273.5(a) (DV Resulting in Traumatic Condition)

Elements

(1) D willfully inflicted a physical injury on his spouse/cohabitant/former or someone with whom he had, or previously had, a dating relationship
(2) The injury inflicted by the D resulted in a traumatic condition

Punishment: Triad 2-3-4

Case Law/Notes

Domestic Violence (Primer)

Domestic Violence: Abuse + Special Relationship.
- Two definitions of what constitutes DV: (1) PC 13700; & (2) Family Codes 6203 & 6211
PC 13700
- Abuse means (1) intentionally or recklessly causing or attempting to cause bodily injury, or (2) placing another person in reasonable apprehension of imminent SBI to himself/herself or another
- Special Relationship. DV means abuse committed against
  - Spouse/former
  - Cohabitant/former
  - Parent of child in common
  - Dating/engagement
Family Codes 6203 & 6211
- Family Code 6203: Abuse. (1) intentionally/recklessly cause or attempt to cause bodily injury (2) sexual assault (3) place in reasonable apprehension of imminent SBI to that person or another (4) behavior that could be enjoined under FC 6320 (harassment/threats/violence)
- Abuse is not limited to actual infliction of physical injury or assault
- Family Code 6211: Special Relationship. DV is abuse perpetrated against:
  - Spouse/former
  - Cohabitant/former
  - Dating/engagement
  - Parent of child in common
  - Child
  - Consanguinity up to 2

PC 273.5(a)

Statute: A defendant violates section 273.5 when he or she “willfully inflicts corporal injury resulting in a traumatic condition” upon one’s spouse, domestic partner, etc. (PC 273.5(a), (b)(1)-(4).)
- Rationale. “The purpose of section 273.5 is to protect persons … in a special relationship for which society demands, and the victim may reasonably expect, stability and safety, and in which the victim, for these reasons among others, may be especially vulnerable.” (People v. Vega (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 706, 710.)
A traumatic condition is a wound or other bodily injury, whether minor or serious, caused by the direct application of physical force (CALCRIM 840.)
- Degree of harm sufficient for traumatic condition is less than what is required for PC 243(d) or PC 245(a). (People v. Gutierrez (1985) 171 Cal.App.3d 944, 952.)
Sufficient for Traumatic Condition
- California case law interpreting section 273.5 make clear that even a minor injury is sufficient to satisfy the statutory definition of traumatic condition. (People v. Reid (2024) 105 Cal.App.5th 446, 457; People v. Abrego (1993) 21 Cal.App.4th 133, 138.)
- Bruising sufficient for traumatic condition. (People v. Beasley (2003) 105 Cal.App.4th 1078, 1085.)
- Strangulation (statutorily defined). Traumatic condition “means a condition of the body … including … injury as a result of strangulation or suffocation, whether of a minor or serious nature, caused by physical force. For purposes of this section, ‘strangulation’ and ‘suffocation’ include impeding the normal breathing or circulation of the blood of a person by applying pressure on the throat or neck.” (PC 273.5(d).)
Insufficient for Traumatic Condition
- Slapping with soreness and tenderness is insufficient. (People v. Abrego (1993) 21 Cal.App.4th 133, 137-138.)
Corporal injury. The term ‘corporal injury’ is unambiguous and means bodily injury. (People v. Serrano (2022) 77 Cal.App.5th 902, 919.)
- “The word ‘corporal’ means ‘of, relating to, or affecting the body.’ [internal citation omitted] The word ‘injury’ is defined as ‘hurt, damage, or loss sustained.’” (People v. Reid (2024) 105 Cal.App.5th 446, 455.)
Cohabitant. Requires something more than a platonic, rooming-house arrangement.
- Refers to an unrelated couple “living together in a substantial relationship-one manifested, minimally, by permanence and sexual or amorous intimacy.” (People v. Holifield (1988) 205 Cal.App.3d 993, 1000.)
- Permanent address is not required, can be found even in “unstable or transitory” living conditions. (People v. Belton (2008) 168 Cal.App.4th 432, 438.)
Continuing Course of Conduct
- Unanimity Not Required. Either one act or cumulative effect of multiple acts can result in violation of PC 273.5. Therefore, DDA was not required to elect and jury not required to unanimously agree on the same act. (People v. Thompson (1984) 160 Cal.App.3d 220.)
- Multiple Acts Can Support Multiple Charges. Where two victims, DDA can charge multiple acts of abuse where each battery satisfies elements of PC 273.5. Statute does not restrict ability to charge one count of spousal abuse for each battery over time. (People v. Healy (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 1137.)
Statute of Limitations: 7 years. (PC 803.7(a).)
Special Allegation: PC 12022.7(e)
- This can include D beating up ex-GF’s current BF. (People v. Truong (2001) 90 Cal.App.4th. 887, 900.)
Sentencing
- PC 273.5(a) // Triad: 2-3-4
- PC 273.5(f)(1) // Triad: 2-4-5
  - Present Offense + Prior Conviction w/n 7 years for PC 273.5(a); PC 243(d); PC 243.4; PC 244; PC 244.5; PC 245
  - If probation granted:
    - 1 prior: mandatory minimum 15d CJ. (PC 273.5(h)(1).)
    - 2 priors: mandatory minimum 60d CJ. (PC 273.5(h)(2).)
- PC 273.5(f)(2) // Triad: 2-3-4
  - Present Offense + Prior Conviction w/n 7 years for PC 243(e)
  - If probation granted:
    - 1 prior: mandatory minimum 15d CJ. (PC 273.5(h)(1).)
    - 2 priors: mandatory minimum 60d CJ. (PC 273.5(h)(2).)
- If Probation Granted: terms consistent with PC 1203.097. (PC 273.5(g).)
  - Minimum period: 36 months. (PC 1203.097(a)(1).)
    - Maximum period: AT for offense convicted of (i.e. for PC 273.5(a) max period would be 4 years, for PC 273.5(f)(1) max period would be 5 years)
  - CPO (court required to CONSIDER)
  - Booking D w/n one week of sentencing if D has not already been booked. (PC 1203.097(a)(4).)
  - Minimum 1 year batter’s program. (PC 1203.097(a)(6).)
    - See PC 1203.097(c) for specifics of counseling program.
  - Community Service. (PC 1203.097(a)(8).)
  - Fines/fees for DV fund and battered women’s shelter
- NCO. Up to 10 years. (PC 136.2(j); PC 273.5(j).)
Lesser Included Offenses.
- PC 240 is a necessarily included offense of PC 273.5. (People v. Serrano (2022) 77 Cal.App.5th 902, 919.)
CALCRIM 840
Self-Defense. (CALCRIM 3470.)
- D acted in lawful self-defense if:
  - (1) D reasonably believed
    - (a) He was in imminent danger of suffering bodily injury/or was in imminent danger of being touched unlawfully;
    - (b) the immediate use of force was necessary to defend against that danger;
  - (2) D used no more force than was reasonably necessary to defend against that danger.
- People have the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that at least one of the elements of self-defense listed above is not met in this case. (CALCRIM 3470.)
- Danger is imminent if, when the D used force, the danger actually existed or the defendant reasonably believed it existed.
  - The danger must seem immediate and present, so that it must be instantly dealt with.
  - It may not be merely prospective or in the near future. (CALCRIM 3470.)
- When considering whether D’s belief’s were reasonable, consider all the circumstances as they were known to and appeared to the D and consider what a reasonable person in a similar situation with similar knowledge would have believed. (CALCRIM 3470.)