California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Camargo, F064077 (Cal. App. 2014):
Under the plain meaning of the foregoing language in the involuntary manslaughter statute ( 192, subd. (b)), which Camargo refers to as "generic", involuntary manslaughter cannot be charged as a matter of law in cases involving homicides committed through the use of a vehicle. As discussed, the constitutional right to jury instructions on lesser included offenses is not absolute because the defendant must present evidence substantial enough for a jury to convict the defendant of the lesser included offense. (People v. Breverman, supra, 19 Cal.4th at p. 162.) Here, the evidence did not merit the jury's consideration of involuntary manslaughter under section 192, subdivision (b). Camargo committed the offense while driving a motor vehicle and he could therefore not be charged with or convicted of involuntary manslaughter. He therefore had no right to have the jury instructed on involuntary manslaughter.