Does a defendant have the malice to murder element required for the assault and assault charges?

Defense counsel also disputed that defendant had the malice aforethought required for the charged assault offense, arguing to the jury that (as for the attempted murder charge) defendant did not have the intent to kill. However, as the jury was instructed, even when there is no intent to kill, the malice element may be satisfied based on conscious disregard for life. (People v. Cravens (2012) 53 Cal.4th 500, 507 [malice may be express (intent to kill) or implied (deliberate performance of act that is dangerous to life with knowledge of danger and conscious disregard for life].) The evidence overwhelmingly establishes conscious disregard for life. Defendant repeatedly stabbed the victim in his facial and head areas, including his neck; the victim momentarily lost consciousness and experienced profuse bleeding; and the location of the stab wounds threatened vital areas including blood vessels, the airway, and the brain. Given the essentially undisputed evidence showing a purposeful attack to highly-sensitive body areas, there is no reasonable possibility the jury might have rejected a finding of conscious disregard for life if it had not heard about defendant's admission at the disciplinary hearing.