Voluntary Manslaughter Charge under PC 192(a) in Livermore Road Rage Incident

March 15, 2013 | Rabin Nabizadeh | Vehicular Homicide, Voluntary Manslaughter

Cort Holbrook, a software engineer out of Livermore, was out about town when he noticed that Ricky Zeismer was driving erratically and causing dangerous issues with the traffic ahead.  The two eventually pulled over and got into a serious scuffle, with Holbrook receiving several kicks and punches from Zeismer.  The road rage incident ended only when Holbrook felt it necessary to stab Zeismer, resulting in his eventual death, in order to protect himself.  Holbrook certainly has the cuts and bruises to prove it.

Alameda County prosecutors attempted to charge Holbrook with 2nd degree murder, but were unsuccessful.  Instead, a charge of “voluntary manslaughter” was entered and Holbrook will serve somewhere between 4 and 12 years in a California state prison for his actions.

California Penal Code, §192(a) speaks to voluntary manslaughter and the criteria for such a charge are quite specific.  In order to be considered voluntary manslaughter, a killing must be committed under certain circumstances – such as a sudden altercation or in the heat of the moment, when passions are high.  Furthermore, it must be proven that the accused was provoked and had no choice but to have an irrational response.  “Sufficient provocation” is key in these types of cases and, though it is ill defined, the level of provocation must be high in order to enter this defense.

A charge of voluntary manslaughter – as opposed to the far more serious 2nd degree murder – means the difference between a maximum of 11 years in state prison versus life imprisonment or even execution.  Following the argument of the criminal defense attorney, the jury agreed with Holbrook – that he acted in self-defense, was sufficiently provoked, and that he acted in the heat of the moment when he chose to take out his knife to protect himself against Zeismer.

If you or someone you know is facing charges of vehicular homicide contact a criminal defense attorney at the San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland or Burlingame offices of Summit Defense Attorneys for free initial consultation.

latest news

April 14, 2025
What is the exclusionary rule?
At Summit Defense, our criminal defense attorneys know that the exclusionary rule protects your Constitutional rights when facing criminal charges. This legal rule stops police officers from using evidence they got through illegal searches. When a law enforcement official breaks the law while gathering evidence, courts can order the evidence inadmissible, preventing its use against [...]
April 13, 2025
Can the police search a car that has been towed?
Police searches of vehicles are common in criminal cases. But many people don’t know their rights when a car gets towed or impounded. A big question we often hear is: Can police officers search a towed vehicle without a warrant? This question involves your constitutional rights under the Fourth Amendment. Police may claim a legal basis for searching a car [...]
April 13, 2025
Can tangible evidence be admitted if it was discovered because of a Miranda violation?
If the police arrest you and ask questions without reading your Miranda Rights, anything you say might be tossed out. But what if that statement leads to a gun, drugs, or other tangible evidence? Can that still be used in court? The answer isn’t simple. Courts often treat statements and physical evidence differently. While a statement may be excluded after a Miranda violation, [...]