(190.3, factor (a).) Defendant twice asserts in his opening brief that in People v. Ortiz, supra, 51 Cal.3d 975, 275 Cal.Rptr. As noted above, Hernandez testified that on March 17, 1985, about 11:00 p.m., defendant followed her into her garage and shot her as she was about to enter the condominium she shared with Okazaki. The admission of photographs of a victim lies within the broad discretion of the trial court when a claim is made that they are unduly gruesome or inflammatory. 8.85 do not violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments by failing to delete inapplicable sentencing factors or delineate between aggravating and mitigating circumstances. (People v. Smith (2003) 30 Cal.4th 581, 641, 134 Cal.Rptr.2d 1, 68 P.3d 302; People v. Marshall (1990) 50 Cal.3d 907, 269 Cal.Rptr. Defendant places great emphasis on the prospective juror's statement that he would vote to impose the death penalty unless he was convinced otherwise, but this comment must be considered in light of the prospective juror's explanation that he would not necessarily be committed from the outset to the imposition of the death penalty. The trial court's implied finding that the prospective juror's views on the death penalty would not substantially impair the performance of his duties as a juror is supported by substantial evidence. They entered and found Vincent Zazzara lying dead on the couch in the den. I realize that that is going to be a very difficult one for you, but I would like you to get working on that as well.. The trial court did not err in admitting the challenged photographs of the victims. [] This is also a concern of several of the other jurors and we were wondering if anything could be done to correct this situation., In response, the court admonished the jury that it was important to be attentive, adding: But if any of you feel that you have missed any of the evidence in a significant way it is incumbent upon you, under the oath that you took as a juror, to bring that to the court's attention. Bell was lying on the floor next to the bed in another bedroom with a table on her chest. Michele ), The size of the community also militates against granting defendant's request for a change of venue. He was a student, Salerno said in the documentary. Her skull had been fractured; the injury could have been caused by a hammer. Do you realize, both Messrs. Hernandez, the family funds may be insufficient to adequately reimburse you for your services in this matter and, recognizing that fact, do you understand it may be necessary once you are attorneys of record in this case to perform some or all of your services on a pro bono basis? Defendant argues that the cumulative effect of errors in the guilt and penalty phases of the trial requires reversal of the judgment. Copyright 2023, Thomson Reuters. Defendant did not object to, or move to quash, the new master list used to select the jury in the present case and thus has forfeited this issue. And we declined to hold in Beeler that even the death of a juror's parent is so debilitating that the juror is presumptively unable to deliberate. (People v. Beeler, supra, 9 Cal.4th at p. 990, 39 Cal.Rptr.2d 607, 891 P.2d 153.). That is an avenue I think that has to be explored one way or another., The next month, on March 24, 1987, the court spoke to defense counsel about when they were going to file a severance motion and then added: The 1368 and related issues I would also like you to consider. Before MARKEY* , Chief Judge, and WALLACE and HUG, Circuit Judges. During a court appearance, he held up the pentagram and after pleading not guilty, he said, Hail Satan., Also Read: Murder Charges Dropped Against Curtis Flowers, Subject of True Crime Podcast 'In the Dark'. He took jewelry, money, and a videocassette recorder and left. (People v. Schmeck (2005) 37 Cal.4th 240, 305, 33 Cal.Rptr.3d 397, 118 P.3d 451; People v. Box (2000) 23 Cal.4th 1153, 1217, 99 Cal.Rptr.2d 69, 5 P.3d 130.). Citing the decisions in Wheat v. United States (1988) 486 U.S. 153, 108 S.Ct. The Night Stalker bought a machete and broke into the house of Lela and Maxson Kneiding. Investigators identified him as an enraged killer because of how viciously his victims He went into the bedroom and shot her husband, Chainarong, in the head, killing him. Footprints on the bucket and in the flower bed were made by an Avia athletic shoe. Defendant personally waived his right to testify in his own behalf and stated that he agreed with his counsel's decision not to present any additional evidence at the penalty phase. Five went to Arizona, and one was sold in Los Angeles. 699-702, 139 P.3d at pp. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., argued, for plaintiff-appellee. A. Accordingly, the court's instruction to consider defendant's age, without further elaboration, was sufficient in this case. The firefighter who responded found the iron security gate and the front door open. ), Defendant relies upon our decision in People v. Beeler (1995) 9 Cal.4th 953, 986-991, 39 Cal.Rptr.2d 607, 891 P.2d 153, in which the father of one of the jurors died while the jury was deliberating in the penalty phase of a capital trial. Although several of the photographs certainly are gruesome, especially the photograph of Maxine Zazzara with her eyes cut out, they were not unduly so. On March 28, 1985, about 8:30 p.m., Polo went to the home that Vincent Zazzara shared with his wife Maxine to deliver the day's receipts from the restaurant and In the docuseries, detective Frank Salerno says, he got comfortable after killing someone he would take the time to have a snack. at p. 742, 263 Cal.Rptr. As we stated before, we have no knowledge of any potential conflicts; but if there are any, we will notify whatever court this case is before. Raymond Arce, Director of Jury Management, Office of the Jury Commissioner, testified that each fiscal year, usually in May, a master list of potential jurors in Los Angeles County is compiled using records from the county registrar of voters and the California Department of Motor Vehicles. Paramedics arrived and found Bell still breathing and took her to a hospital. In court, during his arraignment in municipal court, defendant said, Hail Satan, and displayed a pentagram and the number 666 on his palm. 80.) Florence L. later regained consciousness, but police were unable to communicate with her. Each juror makes an individual evaluation of each fact or circumstance offered in mitigation of penalty. We have suggested that in appropriate circumstances' a trial court may be required to give a requested jury instruction that pinpoints a defense theory of the case But a trial court need not give a pinpoint instruction if it is argumentative [citation] [or] merely duplicates other instructions [citation] (People v. Bolden, supra, 29 Cal.4th 515, 558, 127 Cal.Rptr.2d 802, 58 P.3d 931.) 80.) He also cites, as evidence of his delusional thinking and probable mental incompetence, the following statement he made just before the court imposed sentence: As for what is said of my life, there have been lies in the past and there will be lies in the future. Murder and rape are assaultive crimes against the person and, as such, are offenses of the same class of crimes' within the meaning of section 954 and were properly joinable. 269, 790 P.2d 676. On April 14, 1986, during the preliminary hearing in municipal court, defense counsel requested that we be allowed to talk to you in chambers and without the presence of the prosecutor regarding a request by defendant not to attend the preliminary hearing. Q. ), Section 1368 states: (a) If, during the pendency of an action and prior to judgment, a doubt arises in the mind of the judge as to the mental competence of the defendant, he or she shall state that doubt in the record and inquire of the attorney for the defendant whether, in the opinion of the attorney, the defendant is mentally competent [] (b) If counsel informs the court that he or she believes the defendant is or may be mentally incompetent, the court shall order that the question of the defendant's mental competence is to be determined in a hearing which is held pursuant to Sections 1368.1 and 1369., In People v. Hayes (1999) 21 Cal.4th 1211, 91 Cal.Rptr.2d 211, 989 P.2d 645, defense counsel asserted that his client was incompetent and moved for a hearing pursuant to section 1368. [Citation.] 5. The court stated: Her death is tragic and I think we all grieve for her, but what happened to her does not add or diminish anything to the evidence as to whether or not Mr. Ramirez is guilty or innocent of these charges. WebMadison, Wisconsin white page directory listings include full name, phone number and address. Ft. single family home built in 1955 that was last sold on 10/31/1996. Defendant contends the trial court erred in denying his motion for change of venue under section 1033, depriving him of his rights under article I, section 15 of the California Constitution and the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. WE CONCUR: GEORGE, C.J., KENNARD, BAXTER, WERDEGAR, CHIN, and CORRIGAN, JJ. The trial judge then engaged the prospective juror in the following colloquy: The Court: If you as [a] juror found a defendant guilty of first degree murder and you also found a special circumstance to be true beyond a reasonable doubt, would that put you in a position where in every case would you always vote for the death penalty? He denied that he would always vote to impose the death penalty for first degree murder no matter what the circumstances that led to that conviction. He stated that he would not necessarily be committed from the outset to the imposition of the death penalty.. One of the victim's shoes was found on the ground and the other was in her car. But the procedures to which defendant objected in the trial court, and which the trial court found did not produce a constitutionally significant underrepresentation of Hispanics, were not the procedures used to select his jury. He ordered her to lie on the bed and raped her and sodomized her. On the carpet and on a tissue, police found shoe prints from an Avia athletic shoe. Defendant fails to explain how either of these cases has any relevance to the present case. ), The defendant in People v. Ortiz, supra, 51 Cal.3d 975, 275 Cal.Rptr. If an exact match is found, that name is removed from the DMV list. 81, 9, p. Hypocrites one and all. ), [T]he rule applied when the trial judge is not aware of the conflict (and thus not obligated to inquire) is that prejudice will be presumed only if the conflict has significantly affected counsel's performance (Mickens v. Taylor (2002) 535 U.S. 162, 172-173, 122 S.Ct. ), The nature and gravity of the present offenses could not have been more serious, but this factor alone does not require a change of venue. 346-347, 100 S.Ct. The trial court did not err in giving the challenged jury instruction. The trial court denied defendant's motion to sever some of these counts and try these charges in eight separate trials. [T]he reviewing court must independently examine the record and determine de novo whether a fair trial is or was obtainable. [Citation.] [Citation.] The jury reasonably could have concluded that defendant abandoned his plan to steal in order to flee and avoid apprehension. On the ride to the police station, defendant asked the officer to just shoot me, saying he wanted to die. This was reasonable, because this was the area from which the jurors actually were summoned. Although we held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in ordering the jury to resume deliberations, defendant in the present case relies upon our added observation: We do not suggest that a more detailed inquiry by the court would have served no purpose. (Id. (People v. Gray, supra, 37 Cal.4th 168, 237, 33 Cal.Rptr.3d 451, 118 P.3d 496.). 586-587, 186 Cal.Rptr. Defendant shoved her aside and entered the condominium. at p. 293, fn. Born May 15, 1940 Died March 29, 1985 (44) Add to list Credits IMDbPro Archive Footage Previous 7 First Blood Self - Murder Victim (archive footage) TV Series 2022 1 episode omitted.) Defendant introduced photographs of the residences of Joyce Nelson and Christopher and Virginia Petersen. 1507, 16 L.Ed.2d 600.) Although the prospective juror in the present case described himself as a strong supporter of the death penalty, he assured the court multiple times that he would not automatically vote for the death penalty and would, instead, reach a decision based upon all of the evidence. Do you understand if at any time in the future you change your mind and desire to obtain independent legal advice regarding the contract, you have the right to ask the court to appoint an attorney to discuss that matter with you? The trial court selected the 20-mile radius as the community to which to compare the percentage of Hispanics. The court instructed the jury on several occasions, including before the circumstances of the juror's death were made public, to avoid media accounts. A. Dictionary of American Family Names Patrick Hanks 2003, 2006. Weeks also pointed out that the process of eliminating duplicate names from the two lists was inaccurate, because only the exact last name and the first four letters of the first name were compared. In order to preserve this issue for review, the defendant must object to the panel or move to quash the jury venire on this ground. (People v. Lewis (2001) 25 Cal.4th 610, 634, 106 Cal.Rptr.2d 629, 22 P.3d 392.) ] (Ibid.) I believe that the deliberations of the jury are very near sacred in society and to interfere with them by allowing counsel to voir dire them about how they feel about Mrs. Singletary's death, how that has affected their deliberation, or even for the court to make such an inquiry, would probably be a fatal mistake. Best of 867, 750 P.2d 741. Defendant refused to remove his sunglasses after being ordered to do so by the trial judge in open court. [Citation.] The high court denied relief, distinguishing Holloway on the basis that counsel had not protested his inability simultaneously to represent multiple defendants. (Mickens, at p. 173, 122 S.Ct. [M]ore is required to raise a doubt [as to a defendant's competence] than mere bizarre actions [citation] or bizarre statements [citation] or statements of defense counsel that defendant is incapable of cooperating in his defense [citation] or psychiatric testimony that defendant is immature, dangerous, psychopathic, or homicidal or such diagnosis with little reference to defendant's ability to assist in his own defense [citation]. (People v. Laudermilk, supra, 67 Cal.2d 272, 285, 61 Cal.Rptr. Okay. ] (People v. Cox (1991) 53 Cal.3d 618, 666, 280 Cal.Rptr. The house had been ransacked. She fell to the ground and lay still while defendant entered the condominium. ] (Ibid.) The victim had been stabbed multiple times in her upper chest, neck, arm, and leg and had some wounds on her hands. You heard the description of the wounds that she suffered and these photographs do depict those wounds. She had a thumb cuff2 on her left thumb and her other thumb had blood on it. WebWe met with several agents as we considered putting our house on the market, and Rachel was the clear, stand-out winner. (a)),1 one count of second degree murder (187, subd. Trending. Our decision in Drumgo, accordingly, has no application here. In a subsequent pleading, defendant argued the charges should be tried in eight different trials involving the following groups of victims: (1) Petersen and Elyas A. on August 5 and 8, 1985; (2) Okazaki and Yu, on March 17, 1985; (3) Zazzara and Chainarong K. on March 28 and July 19, 1985; (4) Higgins7 ; (5) Vincow on June 27, 1984; (6) Bell, Doi, Cannon, Whitney B., Nelson, and Kneiding on May 14 and 29, and July 2, 5, 7, and 19 of 1985; (7) Sophie D. on July 7, 1985; and (8) Carol K. on May 30, 1985. The trial court did not err in denying the motion for change of venue. We are all expendable for a cause, and no one knows that better than those who kill for policy, clandestinely or openly, as do the governments of the world which kill in the name of God and country and for whatever else they deem appropriate. The trial court denied defendant's motion for change of venue on January 9, 1987, stating it was not convinced that the survey shows that the pretrial publicity in this case has created an atmosphere where he cannot receive a fair trial. The court described the news coverage of this case as saturation, as much as they possibly can give, but noted that this was not the only case in Los Angeles that had received such extensive news coverage. Defendant argues that he was denied his rights to due process and to trial by a fair and impartial jury under the Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the federal Constitution because the trial court failed to conduct an adequate inquiry and declare a mistrial following the murder of a juror.

Pistol Permit Course Rensselaer County Ny, Articles M

About the author