] (People v. Lewis, supra, 25 Cal.4th 610, 676, 106 Cal.Rptr.2d 629, 22 P.3d 392; People v. Blair (2005) 36 Cal.4th 686, 737, 31 Cal.Rptr.3d 485, 115 P.3d 1145.) (People v. Massie (1998) 19 Cal.4th 550, 570, 79 Cal.Rptr.2d 816, 967 P.2d 29, and cases cited therein.) 644, 431 P.2d 228. Prior to the in camera hearing on October 24, 1985, referred to above, at which the court substituted Arturo Hernandez and Daniel Hernandez as counsel, Defense Counsel Gallegos appeared in camera in the municipal court with former defense counsel, Deputy Public Defender Henry Hall, and asked the judge to order a psychiatric evaluation of defendant as to his present mental state, his ability to choose his own attorney and other related matters concerning this trial. As noted above, the municipal court had taken under submission defendant's request to substitute new counsel in place of Attorney Gallegos. On the morning of August 31, 1985, Manuela Villanueva was sitting in her parked car when defendant ran up and demanded her car keys. The jury reasonably could have concluded that defendant intended to steal, but was interrupted when Hernandez unexpectedly opened the garage door and fled. To preserve a claim of trial court error in failing to remove a juror for bias in favor of the death penalty, a defendant must either exhaust all peremptory challenges and express dissatisfaction with the jury ultimately selected or justify the failure to do so. Challenge for Cause to Juror Robert D. The prospective jurors were sequestered and individually questioned concerning their views on the death penalty as then required by our decision in Hovey v. Superior Court (1980) 28 Cal.3d 1, 80, 168 Cal.Rptr. 7, 51 Cal.Rptr.2d 770, 913 P.2d 980.). She ran out of the car and called for help. Defendant contends the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury that it must determine the proper penalty beyond a reasonable doubt. But as time went on without a sign of Ramirez, the dentists office suggested installing an alarm that employees could press when Ramirez came back, directly alerting the cops, which they did. He shot Vincent first, then brutally assaulted Maxine by stabbing her to death. Defendant further argues that the trial court erred in failing to order a competency hearing sua sponte. In view of the above facts, the court is ordering that both attorneys make full disclosure to Mr. Ramirez of any facts which might bear on their ability to effectively represent him in this case After this disclosure, if there are any made, the court will, if Mr. Ramirez desires, offer him independent assistance to check any information disclosed to him. You are not expected to. In order to preserve an issue for review, a defendant must not only request the court to act, but must press for a ruling. It simply isn't proving anything. The point is that what you are presenting is cumulative and repetitive and it isn't proving anything. Maxine Zazzara - IMDb Dr. Unfortunately, Ramirez didnt spare children. The trial court did not err in failing to order a competency hearing sua sponte during the penalty phase. He continued to beat her, forcing her to swear upon Satan that she would not scream. Defendant asserts that the above quoted inquiry of counsel was deficient because the court failed to determine the nature of the terms and conditions of the retainer agreements entered into between defendant and counsel and defendant's family and counsel, failed to determine the impact of counsels' agreement with the family on their representation of defendant, and failed to consider the impact of the agreements with respect to counsel's purported waiver of appellant's right to a full and proper inquiry regarding his mental competency. Defendant asserts that counsels' expressed willingness to represent defendant pro bono, if necessary, deepened the appearance of grave conflicts of interest, triggering the trial court's duty of inquiry., The right to effective assistance of counsel, secured by the Sixth Amendment to the federal Constitution, and article I, section 15 of the California Constitution, includes the right to representation that is free from conflicts of interest. [Citation.] Hypocrites one and all. Defendant argues on appeal that the trial court erred in denying his motion for severance in violation of his Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights, asserting that this case could have been easily severed, for example, into four separate groups. The trial court did not err in denying defendant's severance motion.6, Section 954 permits related offenses to be charged in a single accusatory pleading unless there is good cause to try them separately: An accusatory pleading may charge two or more different offenses connected together in their commission or two or more different offenses of the same class of crimes or offenses, provided, that the court in which a case is triable, in the interests of justice and for good cause shown, may in its discretion order that the different offenses or counts set forth in the accusatory pleading be tried separately or divided into two or more groups and each of said groups tried separately., Defendant's motion in the trial court to sever the charges was confusing. Defendant does not contend on appeal that his waiver of his right to present penalty phase evidence was invalid or resulted in error, although he indicates he will raise such claims in a subsequent habeas corpus petition. A window in the bedroom was open and the bedroom had been ransacked. The prosecutor suggested that defendant again wear a leg brace rather than leg chains. Defendant asserts that this error undermined his defense in violation of his right, inter alia, to fair trial, effective assistance of counsel, due process and fundamental fairness under the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.. Defendant then fled. 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. The court denied the prosecutor's request to stay the determinate sentence pending execution of the death sentence, but ordered that the determinate sentence be served after the death sentence was imposed. I also have seen him not quite as attentive as a result of his dozing off. The high court held that the defendant was denied due process, concluding that it was a denial of due process of law to refuse the request for a change of venue, after the people of Calcasieu Parish had been exposed repeatedly and in depth to the spectacle of Rideau personally confessing in detail to the crimes with which he was later to be charged because the televised spectacle of the defendant confessing to the crimes rendered his subsequent trial but a hollow formality. (Id. Trending. As we explained in People v. Bittaker (1989) 48 Cal.3d 1046, 1087-1088, 259 Cal.Rptr. The Governor may ameliorate any sentence by use of the commutation or pardon power (People v. Arias, supra, 13 Cal.4th 92, 172, 51 Cal.Rptr.2d 770, 913 P.2d 980; People v. Ward (2005) 36 Cal.4th 186, 220, 30 Cal.Rptr.3d 464, 114 P.3d 717.) Though entitlement to representation by a particular attorney is not absolute [citation], the state should keep to a necessary minimum its interference with the individual's desire to defend himself in whatever manner he deems best, using any legitimate means within his resources-and that desire can constitutionally be forced to yield only when it will result in significant prejudice to the defendant himself or in a disruption of the orderly processes of justice unreasonable under the circumstances of the particular case [citation]. (Id. He was previously married to Maxine Zazzara and Betty Grace Peterson Zazzara. Based upon these figures, the relative disparity in Bell was 62.5 percent. 618, 545 P.2d 1322.). Nenette Evans: My Life With Bill A person cannot be tried or adjudged to punishment while that person is mentally incompetent. Duenas grabbed a telephone to call the police and returned to the balcony. That person was apprehended and questioned, but then released. This court fully recognizes that the defendant has the right to retained counsel of his choice at all stages of the proceedings against him. We repeatedly have upheld such triple use of the same facts. However, that lead would cause some issues down the line. On January 20, 1988, defendant filed a motion to quash all existing jury panels on the ground that Hispanics were systematically underrepresented on the jury venire.8 An evidentiary hearing spanning several days was held in April and May, 1988. The defendant's only contention on appeal in such circumstances can be that he or she was denied effective assistance of counsel. [Citations. It is a decision which must be made by the defendant In addition, the court has requested that the agreement retaining Mr. Arturo Hernandez and Mr. Daniel Hernandez be reduced to writing and that Mr. Ramirez be given the opportunity to discuss that contract with an independent attorney appointed by this court. Citing the decisions in Wheat v. United States (1988) 486 U.S. 153, 108 S.Ct. 79-2577. (See People v. Sanders (1990) 51 Cal.3d 471, 492, fn. maxine zazzara house He hacked them with the weapon then shot both in the head. She was previously married to The Court Okay. The court instructed the jury on several occasions, including before the circumstances of the juror's death were made public, to avoid media accounts. Build Your House at Kettle Creek North in Verona Wisconsin Without a doubt, Mayor Feinstein made a big mistake, said Frank Falzon, a San Francisco police inspector. A screen had been removed from an open bathroom window and was lying on the ground. Each juror should weigh and consider such matters regardless of whether or not they are accepted by other jurors. The court refused this instruction as argumentative and duplicative. This requirement is satisfied in the present case. Using the area within a 20-mile radius of the courthouse as the relevant community, the trial court ruled that the absolute disparity of 3.5 percent, which translated to a relative disparity of 20 percent, was not constitutionally significant. A similar list is drawn from the records of the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). Two days after the attempted murder of Whitney B., on July 7, 1985, a neighbor of Joyce Nelson noticed that a screen had been removed from Nelson's bedroom window. A partial shoe print found on an unplugged clock was consistent with an Avia athletic shoe. WebMaxine Zazzara was born on May 15, 1940 in Arkansas, USA. The temperature of the victim's liver indicated she had been dead only a couple of hours, but that estimate may have been inaccurate, because the body had been covered and the room may have been warm. 5, 273 Cal.Rptr. 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 found the screen door unlocked and the front door ajar. 204.) Defendant contends that his waiver of his right to conflict-free counsel was defective. We have consistently upheld the introduction of autopsy photographs disclosing the manner in which a victim was wounded as relevant not only to the question of deliberation and premeditation but also aggravation of the crime and the appropriate penalty, all of which were at issue here. On appeal, defendant argues that the charges could have been easily severed, for example, into four separate groups involving the following groups of victims: (1) Petersen, Whitney B., Sophie D., and Carol K.; (2) Elyas A., Okazaki, Yu, and Kneiding; (3) Zazzara, Chainarong K., Bell, Cannon, and Nelson; and (4) Vincow. Footprints on the bucket and in the flower bed were made by an Avia athletic shoe. California courts have recognized the need to protect the sanctity of jury deliberations. You don't understand me. Defendant argues that the cumulative effect of errors in the guilt and penalty phases of the trial requires reversal of the judgment. However, the factor relating to defendant's age, as set forth in these instructions, refers to any matter concerning defendant's age, maturity, and judgment which common experience or morality might indicate to be relevant to the issue of penalty. Defendant argues that trial counsel withdrew the requested instruction only in response to the court's request, adding that trial counsel obeyed the court and withdrew the instruction. But the court did not order, or even ask, trial counsel to withdraw the request, it merely observed that the proposed instruction did not appear to pertain to any evidence introduced at trial. Since this time they have come back and they have, in my opinion, based on my observations, resumed their usual demeanor and apparent cheerfulness and ability to get about their business, and I think that is important to remember This court has had nothing that would put it on notice, either by the jury or by its own observations, that would indicate that this jury is not able to continue on with its deliberations. You heard the description of the wounds that she suffered and these photographs do depict those wounds. WebSee sales history and home details for 10234 Strong Ave, Whittier, CA 90601, a 3 bed, 3 bath, 2,012 Sq. 1692, the trial court denied the defendant's request to substitute counsel because it found that the proposed attorney had an irreconcilable conflict of interest that the defendant was not permitted to waive. [Defense Counsel]: Your honor, he has already made an I.D. A woman parking her car in her apartment house's garage was shot, but not killed. 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'. at p. 742, 263 Cal.Rptr. She said, please don't shoot me again and he lowered the gun and ran away. 13, 65 Cal.Rptr.2d 145, 939 P.2d 259; People v. Arias (1996) 13 Cal.4th 92, 126, fn. 113-114.) A .22-caliber bullet recovered from Chainarong K.'s head had been fired from the same gun that fired the bullets that killed Vincent and Maxine Zazzara. On the afternoon of June 28, 1984, Jack Vincow arrived at his elderly mother's apartment in Los Angeles and was surprised to find the screen missing from her open living room window and the front door unlocked. She was previously married to Vincent Zazzara. In the present case, defendant did not request such a limiting instruction. An associate of defendant's later testified that the cap looked like one defendant wore. [] Since we are nearing deliberations, I am concerned that he will not be able to input with total knowledge of what was testified to during the trial. This change increased the percentage of Hispanics on the master list to 28.4 percent, which is more than both the 17.5 percent of the population within a 20-mile radius of the courthouse and the 26.3 percent of the population in the Central Judicial District. According to Dr. Minter, therefore, the absolute disparity between the 14 percent of persons who appeared for jury service and identified themselves as Hispanic and the 16.3 percent of the population within the 20-mile radius who were Hispanics who were eligible for jury service was just 2.3 percent. As noted above, defendant was arrested on August 31, 1985. Each juror makes an individual evaluation of each fact or circumstance offered in mitigation of penalty. Menu. With only one exception, there was evidence of the theft of property in each of the other charged crimes in which defendant entered a residence. On October 30, 1986, defendant called a guard over to his jail cell, displayed photographs of two of the murder victims, and said: People come up here and call me a punk and I show them the photographs and tell them there's blood behind the Night Stalker and then they go away all pale.. On August 21, 1989, defendant filed a motion to voir dire the jurors regarding their reactions to the death of Juror Singletary. As explained above, reversal of the judgment is not required because there were no significant errors in defendant's trial. [] [A] hearing is required only where the court possesses information which, if proven to be true, would constitute good cause to doubt a juror's ability to perform his duties (People v. Ray (1996) 13 Cal.4th 313, 343, 52 Cal.Rptr.2d 296, 914 P.2d 846. Learn more about FindLaws newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Bomdia Bowls Calories,
Furniture Donation Pick Up Jacksonville, Fl,
Dodge Stepside Parts,
Cochise County Rv Permit,
Call To Worship 2021,
Articles M
