The Court of Appeal reversed the judgment of conviction for four counts of attempted murder, finding that insufficient evidence supported giving the CALCRIM 600 kill zone instruction. According to the Court, based on the scope and nature of the attack – appellant used a single, nine-millimeter handgun, fired nine shots from about 10 feet away, and did not shoot in area from which victims would have limited means of escape –, the Court could not conclude that the only reasonable inference was that appellant or his co-defendant specifically intended to kill everyone around the alleged target as a means of killing him.
^