Attempted Murder Lawyers in San Diego (PC 664/187)

Attempted murder under PC 664/187 carries a life sentence. Enhancement stacking can push that to 40+ years. Our San Diego defense lawyers fight these charges at every stage. Call 24/7.

A charge of attempted murder changes everything overnight. Not next month, not next year. Right now. The moment the DA files under PC 664/187, you’re facing the possibility of spending the rest of your life in a California state prison.

Most people facing attempted murder charges never imagined being in this situation. A confrontation that spiraled out of control in seconds. A moment of fear where someone acted to protect themselves, only to have the DA call it something else entirely. A co-defendant pointing fingers to save their own skin. An eyewitness who got it wrong.

Charges are accusations, not convictions. The prosecution still has to prove every element beyond a reasonable doubt, including the one element that matters most in these cases: that you specifically intended to kill another person. That’s a high bar, and it’s a bar the prosecution fails to clear more often than people realize.

The fear, the uncertainty, the weight of what you’re facing: it’s overwhelming. We get it. But the next 30 days will determine whether this follows you for the rest of your life, or whether you have a fighting chance at a different outcome.

At David P. Shapiro Criminal Defense Attorneys, we’ve defended clients charged with attempted murder throughout San Diego County, from premeditated allegations to gang-enhanced cases carrying 40+ years. As experienced San Diego violent crimes defense lawyers, we’ve taken these cases through preliminary hearings, fought them at trial, and achieved outcomes that changed the trajectory of our clients’ lives.

The prosecution is already working to build the strongest case they can. You need experienced defense attorneys working just as hard on yours. Not next week. Today.

Quick Reference: PC 664/187 Attempted Murder

Classification	Felony (always)
Attempted First-Degree (Premeditated)	Life in state prison with possibility of parole
Attempted Second-Degree	5, 7, or 9 years in state prison
Firearm Enhancement (PC 12022.53(b))	+ 10 years consecutive
Firearm Discharge (PC 12022.53(c))	+ 20 years consecutive
Firearm Discharge Causing GBI (PC 12022.53(d))	+ 25 years to life consecutive
Gang Enhancement (PC 186.22)	+ 15 years to life
Strike Offense	Yes, serious and violent felony
Additional	No statute of limitations; limited (if any) custody credits

What Is Attempted Murder Under California Law?

Attempted murder is charged under Penal Code Sections 664 and 187 together. Section 187 defines murder as “the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought.”¹ Section 664 addresses attempts, providing that anyone who attempts to commit a crime but fails, or is prevented or intercepted, can be punished for the attempt.²

So what does that actually mean in practice? It means the prosecution is alleging that you tried to kill someone and didn’t succeed. The person survived, or the attempt was stopped before it could be completed.

There are two critical concepts that separate attempted murder from other violent crimes:

“Direct step” means more than just thinking about it, talking about it, or even planning it. A direct step requires putting a plan into action in a way that goes beyond mere preparation. Buying a weapon is preparation. Firing that weapon at someone is a direct step. The distinction matters enormously, and it’s one of the first things we analyze in every case.

“Intent to kill” is the element that makes attempted murder fundamentally different from assault, battery, or even assault with a deadly weapon. The prosecution must prove you specifically intended to kill another person. Not that you intended to hurt them. Not that you intended to scare them. That you intended to kill them.³

Why does this matter for your defense? Because intent to cause great bodily injury is not enough for attempted murder. Intent to frighten someone is not enough. If the prosecution cannot prove you specifically intended to kill, they cannot convict you of attempted murder, regardless of how serious the injuries were.

What Must the Prosecution Prove?

To convict you of attempted murder under PC 664/187, the prosecution must prove ALL of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:⁴

1. You took at least one direct but ineffective step toward killing another person.

A “direct step” is an action that goes beyond planning, preparation, or mere intent. It means you put a plan into motion in a way that, if not stopped or interrupted, would have resulted in the killing of another person.

What qualifies as a direct step? Firing a weapon at someone. Stabbing someone. Running someone over with a vehicle. Poisoning food you know someone will eat.

What does not qualify? Buying a weapon. Following someone. Making threats without taking action. Researching methods. These are preparation, and preparation alone is not attempted murder, no matter how alarming it may sound.

2. You intended to kill that person.

This is where most attempted murder cases are won or lost. The prosecution must prove express intent to kill. Not intent to injure. Not intent to scare. Not recklessness. Not even conscious disregard for human life. Specific, express intent to kill.⁵

How does the prosecution try to prove intent to kill? Through circumstantial evidence: the type of weapon used, the number of shots fired or blows struck, whether the attack was directed at vital areas of the body, statements made before or during the incident, and what the defendant did afterward (did they stop? flee? call 911? continue attacking?).

Each of those factors is something we can, and will, challenge if the facts support a position to do so.

The burden is on them to prove all of this. Beyond a reasonable doubt. That’s the highest standard in our legal system, and every element is a question mark for the prosecution and an opportunity for the defense.

First-Degree vs. Second-Degree Attempted Murder

The difference between first-degree and second-degree attempted murder is one of the most consequential distinctions in California criminal law. We’re talking about the difference between a life sentence and a sentence of 5 to 9 years. Understanding this distinction is essential.

First-Degree Attempted Murder (Premeditated)

Under Penal Code Section 664(a), if the attempted murder was “willful, deliberate, and premeditated,” it qualifies as first-degree.⁶ The prosecution must prove all three:

Willful means you intended to kill. Deliberate means you carefully weighed the considerations for and against your choice. Premeditated means you decided to kill before acting.

Now, here’s what catches people off guard: premeditation does not require weeks of planning. Courts have found premeditation based on very brief periods of reflection. But there has to be some evidence of deliberation, some weighing of the decision, even if only for moments. A spontaneous, impulsive act does not qualify as premeditated, no matter how violent.

Courts evaluate premeditation using three categories of evidence established in People v. Anderson:⁷ planning activity before the incident, motive (a reason to want the victim dead), and the manner of the attempt (was it carried out in a way that suggests a preconceived design?). The absence of evidence in these categories can be powerful for the defense.

Penalty: Life in state prison with the possibility of parole.⁸

Second-Degree Attempted Murder (Unpremeditated)

All other attempted murders that don’t meet the premeditation threshold fall under second-degree. This typically includes impulsive acts where the defendant formed the intent to kill in the moment, without prior deliberation.

Think about a bar fight that escalates rapidly. Someone grabs a bottle and strikes at the other person’s head. Did they intend to kill? Maybe. Did they premeditate it? Almost certainly not. That’s the distinction.

Penalty: 5, 7, or 9 years in state prison (determinate sentence).⁹

Why This Distinction Matters

The sentencing gap is staggering. A conviction for premeditated attempted murder means life in prison with the possibility of parole, with a minimum of 7 years before parole eligibility. A conviction for unpremeditated attempted murder means a determinate sentence of 5, 7, or 9 years.

Even when the evidence of an attempt is strong, challenging premeditation can be the single most impactful defense strategy available. Reducing first-degree to second-degree changes the entire trajectory of a case.

How Attempted Murder Sentences Are Actually Calculated

Most people look at the base sentence for attempted murder and think that’s what they’re facing. The reality of the situation is far more complicated, because attempted murder cases rarely involve just the base sentence. Enhancement stacking is what turns serious sentences into staggering ones.

Let’s walk through what this actually looks like in practice:

Sentencing Scenarios

Scenario 1: Attempted second-degree murder, no enhancements. Base sentence: 5, 7, or 9 years in state prison. This is the floor for attempted murder, and it’s relatively rare because most attempted murder cases involve some form of weapon or aggravating factor.

Scenario 2: Premeditated attempted murder + personal firearm use (PC 12022.53(b)). Life with parole + 10 years consecutive. The 10-year firearm enhancement is served before the life term begins.¹⁰

Scenario 3: Premeditated attempted murder + firearm discharge causing GBI (PC 12022.53(d)). Life with parole + 25 years to life consecutive. This means a minimum of 32+ years before parole eligibility.¹¹

Scenario 4: Premeditated attempted murder + gang enhancement + firearm discharge causing GBI. 15 years to life (gang-enhanced minimum) + 25 years to life (firearm). Effective sentence: 40+ years to life.^{12 13}

See how quickly these stack? A single attempted murder charge with enhancements can result in a sentence that effectively means the defendant will spend the rest of their life in prison.

SB 620: Judicial Discretion on Firearm Enhancements

Here’s something most people don’t know, and something many attorneys fail to raise. Since January 1, 2018, under Senate Bill 620, judges have discretion to strike firearm enhancements in the interest of justice under Penal Code Section 1385.¹⁴

Before SB 620, firearm enhancements were mandatory. A judge had no choice but to impose them. Now, a skilled defense attorney can present mitigating evidence and argue that striking the enhancement serves the interest of justice.

This is not a guaranteed outcome. Not every judge will exercise this discretion. But it creates an avenue for reducing sentences by 10, 20, or even 25 years to life. That kind of advocacy requires attorneys who understand sentencing law at the highest level and who are prepared to make the case.

Strike Implications

Attempted murder is classified as both a “serious” and “violent” felony under California’s Three Strikes Law.^{15 16} What does that mean practically?

A conviction counts as a strike on your record. Any future felony conviction carries a presumptively doubled sentence. A third strike can result in 25 years to life. And you must be prepared to serve at least 85% of your sentence before becoming eligible for parole.

A strike changes everything, not just for this case, but for the rest of your life. Every future interaction with the criminal justice system is viewed through the lens of that prior strike. This is why fighting the charge now, aggressively and thoroughly, is so critical.

Defense Strategies for Attempted Murder Charges

Attempted murder charges are defensible. The question is identifying the right defense strategy based on the specific facts of your case and then executing that strategy with precision. Many lawyers, based on inexperience, indifference, and/or outright incompetence, will push for a plea before they’ve even investigated the case. These cases require thorough investigation and strategic analysis before anyone can tell you what your best options are.

Lack of Intent to Kill

This is the most critical defense in attempted murder cases, and it’s the one that succeeds most often. The prosecution must prove you specifically intended to kill, not merely to injure, frighten, or threaten. If the evidence shows you intended to cause harm but not death, the charge should be reduced to a lesser offense like assault with a deadly weapon (PC 245) or assault with force likely to cause great bodily injury.

What does that look like in practice? Where a defendant fires a weapon but aims at non-vital areas. Where the weapon used was unlikely to cause death. Where a single punch caused serious injury but the circumstances don’t support an inference of intent to kill. Where the defendant stopped the attack voluntarily before inflicting fatal-level harm.

Intent to kill is almost always proven through circumstantial evidence. That means it can almost always be challenged.

Self-Defense or Defense of Others

If you acted in lawful self-defense or defense of another person, that is a complete defense to attempted murder.¹⁷ You must have reasonably believed you or someone else was in imminent danger of being killed or suffering great bodily injury, reasonably believed the immediate use of deadly force was necessary, and used no more force than was reasonably necessary to defend against that danger.

Even if your belief was honest but unreasonable (what the law calls “imperfect self-defense”), that can reduce attempted murder to attempted voluntary manslaughter, which carries a sentence of roughly 18 months to 5.5 years instead of life.¹⁸

That’s the difference between decades in prison and a sentence measured in single-digit years. Imperfect self-defense is one of the most powerful mitigation tools available in these cases.

Challenging Premeditation and Deliberation

Even when the evidence of an attempt is clear, challenging whether it was premeditated and deliberate can transform the outcome. Courts evaluate premeditation under the Anderson framework:¹⁹ planning activity, motive, and manner of attempt.

The defense can argue spontaneous action, heat of passion, provocation, or the absence of any evidence of planning. If the prosecution cannot prove premeditation, first-degree attempted murder drops to second-degree. Life with parole drops to 5, 7, or 9 years. That’s the kind of reduction that changes everything.

Challenging the Kill Zone Theory

In cases involving multiple victims, the prosecution sometimes argues the “kill zone” theory: that the defendant intended to kill everyone within a particular area (for example, firing into a crowd). The California Supreme Court significantly narrowed this theory in People v. Canizales, requiring the prosecution to prove:²⁰

1. The defendant created a zone of fatal harm around a primary target

2. The defendant intended to kill everyone in that zone

3. The alleged victim was within that zone

Post-Canizales, this theory is much harder for the prosecution to prove. If your case involves multiple counts of attempted murder based on a kill zone argument, this is a critical area for defense.

False Accusation and Mistaken Identity

People are wrongfully accused of attempted murder. Eyewitness identification, particularly in high-stress situations, at night, or across racial lines, is notoriously unreliable. Decades of research confirm this.

We scrutinize every piece of identification evidence: eyewitness accounts, surveillance footage quality, forensic evidence, cell phone location records, and whether witnesses have motives to lie. In drive-by shootings, gang-related incidents, and crimes occurring in chaotic environments, misidentification is a serious and documented problem.

No Direct Step: Mere Preparation

The defense can argue that whatever the defendant did never crossed the line from preparation into a direct step. Under California law, a direct step requires putting a plan into action in a way that would have resulted in the killing if not interrupted.²¹

Acquiring a weapon is preparation. Conducting surveillance is preparation. Even expressing an intention to kill, without more, is not a direct step. If the prosecution cannot prove the defendant moved beyond preparation, there is no attempted murder.

Voluntary Intoxication

Under Penal Code Section 29.4, voluntary intoxication can be considered in determining whether the defendant actually formed the specific intent to kill.²² While intoxication is not a complete defense, it can negate the specific intent element required for attempted murder or the premeditation required for first-degree. This defense has been limited by prior legislation but remains available for specific intent crimes.

Related Charges: Understanding the Differences

Attempted murder exists on a spectrum of violent offenses, and understanding where it sits relative to other charges helps clarify what you’re actually facing and what realistic outcomes look like.

Lesser-Included Offenses

Offense	Code Section	Key Difference
Attempted voluntary manslaughter	PC 664/192(a)	Heat of passion or imperfect self-defense negates malice
Assault with a deadly weapon	PC 245(a)(1)/(a)(2)	Does not require intent to kill
Assault causing great bodily injury	PC 245(a)(4)	Does not require intent to kill
Simple assault	PC 240	Unlawful attempt to commit violent injury

Commonly Co-Charged Offenses

Attempted murder rarely stands alone. Depending on the facts, you may also be facing charges for shooting at an inhabited dwelling or occupied vehicle (PC 246), assault with a deadly weapon (PC 245), criminal threats (PC 422), gang participation (PC 186.22(a)), felon in possession of a firearm (PC 29800), or domestic violence offenses (PC 273.5). The list goes on and on.

Each additional charge carries its own penalties and its own defense considerations. A comprehensive defense strategy addresses the full picture, not just the lead charge.

What Cases Actually Plead Down To

Through negotiation, attempted murder charges can sometimes be reduced to:

Offense	Code Section	Typical Sentence	Strike?
Attempted voluntary manslaughter	PC 664/192(a)	18 months, 3, or 5.5 years	Serious felony
Assault with a deadly weapon	PC 245(a)(1)	2, 3, or 4 years (felony)	Yes
Assault with force likely to cause GBI	PC 245(a)(4)	2, 3, or 4 years (felony)	Yes
Battery causing serious bodily injury	PC 243(d)	Wobbler; up to 4 years (felony)	Yes

The gap between a life sentence and a 3-year sentence is the gap between a case handled by attorneys who know how to investigate, challenge, and negotiate these cases and one handled by attorneys who don’t.

Facing Attempted Murder Charges in San Diego?

Attempted murder cases in San Diego County are prosecuted aggressively, particularly by the DA’s Major Crimes Division and Gang Prosecution Unit. These prosecutors are experienced and well-resourced. You need a defense team that matches that level of preparation and intensity. We’ve defended attempted murder cases from initial investigation through jury verdict, including gang-enhanced cases, firearm cases, and cases involving multiple counts. We know how to challenge the intent element, fight premeditation allegations, and advocate for striking enhancements under SB 620. We know how these cases work in San Diego’s courthouses because we’ve tried them there.

Every day without representation is a day the prosecution works unopposed. Evidence fades. Witnesses forget. The window for the strongest defense is now.

Call us 24/7 for a consultation. We’ll review your case, explain what you’re actually facing, and start building your defense immediately. The bottom line is this: you’re entitled to a defense that matches the seriousness of what you’re up against. You got to know your rights.

References

1. 1. Penal Code, § 187, subd. (a) [“Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought.”]↑ Penal Code, § 187, subd. (a) [“Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought.”]
2. 2. Penal Code, § 664, subd. (a).↑ Penal Code, § 664, subd. (a).
3. 3. See CALCRIM No. 600 [Attempted Murder].↑ See CALCRIM No. 600 [Attempted Murder].
4. 4. See CALCRIM No. 600 [Attempted Murder].↑ See CALCRIM No. 600 [Attempted Murder].
5. 5. See CALCRIM No. 600 [Attempted Murder].↑ See CALCRIM No. 600 [Attempted Murder].
6. 6. Penal Code, § 664, subd. (a).↑ Penal Code, § 664, subd. (a).
7. 7. <em>People v. Anderson</em> (1968) 70 Cal.2d 15.↑ <em>People v. Anderson</em> (1968) 70 Cal.2d 15.
8. 8. Penal Code, § 664, subd. (a).↑ Penal Code, § 664, subd. (a).
9. 9. Penal Code, § 664, subd. (a).↑ Penal Code, § 664, subd. (a).
10. 10. Penal Code, § 12022.53 [Enhancement for personal use of firearm during commission of specified felonies].↑ Penal Code, § 12022.53 [Enhancement for personal use of firearm during commission of specified felonies].
11. 11. Penal Code, § 12022.53 [Enhancement for personal use of firearm during commission of specified felonies].↑ Penal Code, § 12022.53 [Enhancement for personal use of firearm during commission of specified felonies].
12. 12. Penal Code, § 12022.53 [Enhancement for personal use of firearm during commission of specified felonies].↑ Penal Code, § 12022.53 [Enhancement for personal use of firearm during commission of specified felonies].
13. 13. Penal Code, § 186.22, subd. (b)(1) [Gang enhancement].↑ Penal Code, § 186.22, subd. (b)(1) [Gang enhancement].
14. 14. See Penal Code, § 1385 [Judge’s authority to strike enhancements in furtherance of justice]; Senate Bill 620 (2017-2018 Reg. Sess.).↑ See Penal Code, § 1385 [Judge’s authority to strike enhancements in furtherance of justice]; Senate Bill 620 (2017-2018 Reg. Sess.).
15. 15. Penal Code, § 1192.7, subd. (c)(1) [Definition of serious felony].↑ Penal Code, § 1192.7, subd. (c)(1) [Definition of serious felony].
16. 16. Penal Code, § 667.5, subd. (c)(12) [Definition of violent felony].↑ Penal Code, § 667.5, subd. (c)(12) [Definition of violent felony].
17. 17. See CALCRIM No. 505 [Justifiable Homicide: Self-Defense or Defense of Another].↑ See CALCRIM No. 505 [Justifiable Homicide: Self-Defense or Defense of Another].
18. 18. See CALCRIM No. 571 [Voluntary Manslaughter: Imperfect Self-Defense].↑ See CALCRIM No. 571 [Voluntary Manslaughter: Imperfect Self-Defense].
19. 19. <em>People v. Anderson</em> (1968) 70 Cal.2d 15.↑ <em>People v. Anderson</em> (1968) 70 Cal.2d 15.
20. 20. <em>People v. Canizales</em> (2019) 7 Cal.5th 591.↑ <em>People v. Canizales</em> (2019) 7 Cal.5th 591.
21. 21. <em>People v. Superior Court (Decker)</em> (2007) 41 Cal.4th 1.↑ <em>People v. Superior Court (Decker)</em> (2007) 41 Cal.4th 1.
22. 22. Penal Code, § 29.4.↑ Penal Code, § 29.4.