To the average person, being convicted of “mayhem” may sound like being caught doing something a little destructive, and maybe a little silly. After all, thesaurus.com lists serious terms such as “violence” and “anarchy” along with less weighty nouns such as “havoc,” “fracas” and “trouble” as synonymous with “mayhem.”
However, as California criminal attorneys know, a charge of mayhem is no laughing matter – and a charge of aggravated mayhem, even less so.
California Penal Code section 203 states:
… Every person who unlawfully and maliciously deprives a human being of a member of his body, or disables, disfigures, or renders it useless, or cuts or disables the tongue, or puts out an eye, or slits the nose, ear, or lip, is guilty of mayhem.
The criminal charge of mayhem, like much of our legal system, has its roots in English common law. (Sir. Edward Coke, Third Part of the Institutes of the Laws of England: Concerning High Treason and Other Pleas of the Crown. And Criminal Causes, 118 (1747))
California’s own mayhem statute was among our first statutes, and as such it goes all the way back to 1850. Back then, the elements to mayhem were similar to what they are today:
Note that when first enacted, a person had to “cut out” the tongue; today one only needs to cut the tongue, not remove it. The current statute also requires the act be both “unlawful” and “malicious,” whereas in 1850, the act must only be unlawful, or in the case of putting out an eye or eyes, “voluntarily and of purpose.”
Over time, some states have folded their mayhem statutes into their aggravated battery statutes. (Daniel E. Hall, Criminal Law and Procedure, 113 (6th ed., 2011)) California still retains its mayhem statute. In fact, in 1987, the Legislature added a new class of mayhem: aggravated mayhem.
California Penal Code section 205 states:
A person is guilty of aggravated mayhem when he or she unlawfully, under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the physical or psychological well-being of another person, intentionally causes permanent disability or disfigurement of another human being or deprives a human being of a limb, organ, or member of his or her body. For purposes of this section, it is not necessary to prove an intent to kill. Aggravated mayhem is a felony punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for life with the possibility of parole.
After more than 100 years, why did the Legislature add a new class of mayhem to the Penal Code?
First, note the punishments for the different types of mayhem are drastically different. Whereas the triad for a violation of PC 203 is 2, 4 or 8 years (Cal. Pen.C. § 204), the potential sentence for aggravated mayhem is an indeterminate term of life, with the possibility of parole.
Second, it appears that aggravated mayhem grew out of an effort to address what proponents called a gap in the Penal Code.
The various legislative analyses for the bill that added aggravated mayhem to the Penal Code cited several notorious crimes, but the one most cited may have been that of Larry Singleton, who was convicted of raping and chopping the forearms off a teenage girl in 1978. He was sentenced to 14 years and 4 months in state prison under the laws in effect at that time. He was paroled in 1987 after serving 8 years of that sentence.
As Senator Kenneth Maddy stated in his letter urging then-Governor George Deukmejian to sign the bill:
… Although many persons who commit heinous crimes are also sentenced to lengthy terms for numerous sex crimes or for life for attempted murder, SB 589 fills the loophole where numerous sex crimes are not committed, or where there was no intent to commit murder.
The current determinate sentences for mayhem and felony assault do not provide either sufficient punishment nor prevention for these especially egregious crimes. …
Rooted in English common law and still in effect today, California’s mayhem statutes are another example of how the legal meaning of a term can mean something drastically different from a lay meaning.