Is subjective provocation sufficient to reduce murder to second degree?

Appellant argues that CALCRIM No. 570 states an objective test to reduce murder to manslaughter, and that no other instruction apprised the jury that subjective provocation is sufficient to reduce first to second degree murder. Appellant is correct that the test of whether provocation can negate malice in order to reduce murder to voluntary manslaughter is objective, whereas the test of whether provocation can negate deliberation and premeditation to reduce first to second degree murder is subjective. (See People v. Padilla (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 675, 678.) However, the argument that the standard jury instructions on murder and manslaughter are misleading on the issue of provocation, unless accompanied by an additional pinpoint instruction on inadequate, or subjective, provocation, has been rejected. (See People v. Rogers, supra, 39 Cal.4th at p. 880; People v. Jones (2014) 223 Cal.App.4th 995, 1001.)

Page 14