People v. Heitzman

Susan Heitzman's (defendant) disabled father Robert lived with and was severely neglected by her two adult brothers, his nominal caretakers; Susan, who had previously cared for Robert before moving away, visited regularly and knew of the horrific conditions but was prosecuted under California's elder-abuse statute for failing to prevent the abuse after Robert's death, alongside her brothers' separate abuse prosecution. Susan demurred, arguing the statute was unconstitutionally vague as applied to someone with no legal duty to control her brothers' conduct; the trial court agreed and dismissed the charge, but an intermediate appellate court reversed, finding Susan had a duty to act based on the parent-child relationship reflected in other California statutes, and both sides appealed.