From the Sept. 30 decision in People v. Barraza by California Court of Appeal Justice Richard Huffman, joined by Justices William Dato and Truc Do:
[1.] Alberto Jorge Barraza cut off parts of Nikko G.'s hair with a knife as Nikko tried to fight him off. Barraza stabbed Nikko in the leg, severing an artery and killing him.
asserted
Barraza → join → him
A jury convicted Barraza of [1] first degree felony murder, with the underlying felony being robbery and [2] assault with a deadly weapon.
asserted
felony → convict → weapon
Barraza appeals, contending insufficient evidence supported his first degree felony murder conviction because the evidence did not establish a robbery or attempted robbery.
asserted
evidence → appeal → robbery
This appeal presents a question of first impression—whether growing human hair, still attached to the victim's body, constitutes "personal property" for purposes of robbery.
asserted
growing → present → robbery
We conclude that growing human hair that is still attached to a person's head is part of the human body and not personal property.
asserted
that → conclude → body
Accordingly, removing it by force does not meet the legal definition of robbery.
asserted
removing → remove → robbery
Nikko became acquainted with Barraza and two of Barraza's friends—John W., and John's mother, Lee Ann W. (together the Ws).
asserted
Nikko → acquaint → friends
He had long hair that went down to his waist.
asserted
that → have → waist
Nikko took great pride in his hair and had spoken to John about his plan to sell it to a "cancer company that made wigs."
asserted
that → take → wigs
In early 2022, Barraza and his friends turned against Nikko after concluding he had stolen from them.
asserted
he → turn → them
Barraza and John discussed cutting off Nikko's hair to teach him a "lesson."
asserted
Barraza → discuss → lesson
Knowing of Nikko's intention to sell his hair, John referred to it as an "asset"—the "bank account" on top of his head.
asserted
John → know → head
Another acquaintance similarly regarded Nikko's hair as his "prized possession" recalling, "[h]e was always in his hair or always fixing his hair."
asserted
h]e → regard → hair
John went so far as to warn Nikko directly, "don't be surprised if that—that hair gets cut off" "one of these days."
asserted
hair → go → days
On March 26, 2022, Nikko was spending time with two mutual friends of Barraza and John.
asserted
Nikko → spend → Barraza
Nikko was asleep in his friend's car when they drove to Barraza's apartment.
asserted
they → drive → apartment
The friends left Nikko sleeping in the car as they went inside to visit Barraza and the Ws.
asserted
they → leave → Barraza
Upon learning that Nikko was outside in the car, Barraza went outside with a knife to confront him.
asserted
Barraza → learn → him
Barraza opened the car door, grabbed Nikko's hair, which was in a bun, and began cutting it off with the knife.
asserted
which → open → knife
He wanted to cut the entire bun off but Nikko woke up and fought back—kicking Barraza, flailing his arms and screaming for Barraza to stop, crying "'Not my hair.'"
asserted
Barraza → want → hair
Barraza responded by punching Nikko and then stabbed him in the leg with the knife.
asserted
Barraza → respond → knife
The knife penetrated approximately four inches into the back of Nikko's leg, severing the popliteal artery and causing his death.
asserted
knife → penetrate → death
During a police interview, Barraza gave inconsistent accounts of the incident.
asserted
Barraza → give → incident
He admitted to fighting with Nikko and grabbing his hair because he knew "how much [Nikko] like[d] his hair" but denied injuring him.
asserted
Nikko → admit → him
He knew two major arteries were behind the leg, maintained he did not see any blood, and claimed that, had he stabbed Nikko, the amount of blood loss would have made it obvious.
asserted
it → know → loss
He later acknowledged having a knife and attempting to cut off all Nikko's hair but denied that he had stabbed Nikko.
asserted
he → acknowledge → Nikko
At the conclusion of the interview, he wrote an "apology" letter to Nikko's family, characterizing the stabbing as an "accident" and claiming he had only intended to "hurt" and "humiliate" him….
[2.] Human hair, once severed from the head, qualifies as a good or chattel which can be sold, bought, or given away ….
asserted
which → write → good
The question is whether human hair that is still growing and attached to a person's head constitutes "personal property" for purposes of robbery.
asserted
that → grow → robbery
Our independent research has revealed no state or federal case addressing this issue.
asserted
research → reveal → issue
Thus, we turn to the legal definition of robbery.
asserted
we → turn → robbery
Section 211 provides: "Robbery is the felonious taking of personal property in the possession of another, from his person or immediate presence, and against his will, accomplished by means of force or fear."
asserted
Robbery → provide → force
Under the common law, robbery is larceny with the aggravating circumstances that "the property is taken from the person or presence of another" and "is accomplished by the use of force or by putting the victim in fear of injury.
asserted
property → take → injury
Robbery requires "personal property," which necessarily implies "property" such as a purse, necklace or a ring, meaning it cannot be part of the person.
asserted
it → require → person
Attached hair is not a good or chattel; rather, it is anatomically part of a person's body until it is severed.
asserted
it → attach → body
If a defendant forcibly cuts off a person's hair or takes part of the person's scalp in the process, this conduct fits within offenses protecting bodily integrity, such as battery (§ 242) or mayhem (§ 203).
asserted
conduct → cut → battery
If a pair of scissors, a knife, or a razor is held to the person's head to cut the hair this could qualify as assault with a deadly weapon.
uncertain
this → hold → weapon
Thus, severing attached hair fits within offenses protecting bodily integrity rather than proprietary interests and supports the proposition that attached hair should be legally viewed as part of the person.
asserted
hair → sever → person
Additionally, section 211 speaks of taking property "from [the] person."
asserted
section → speak → person
This language presumes the property is distinct from the person.
asserted
property → presume → person
Attached hair, however, is part of the person's body.
asserted
hair → attach → body
…and 16 more, not listed.
The Aporia