Defendant claims that the trial court erred in admitting into evidence photographs of eight of the victims because those photographs were irrelevant, gruesome, and highly inflammatory. There is no provision for a secret disclosure of counsel's feelings. 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. 630, 774 P.2d 659, defendant is entitled to relief only if he can actually show that his right to an impartial jury was affected because he was deprived of a peremptory challenge which he would have used to excuse a juror who sat on his case. Unless, in addition to exhausting his peremptory challenges, the defendant expresses dissatisfaction with the jury ultimately selected, we cannot know whether the earlier denial of the challenge for cause deprived the defendant of a peremptory challenge that he or she would have used to excuse a juror who sat on his case. He was previously married to Maxine Zazzara and Betty Grace Peterson Zazzara. I'd rather die than spend the rest of my life in prison. They should have shot me on the street. As we stated in Johnson, the court's ruling excusing [the juror] can be sustained solely on the basis of its finding that [the juror] had fallen asleep during trial. (Ibid.) Forensic pathologist Dr. Werner Spitz testified, based upon the temperature of Vincow's apartment, her body temperature when found, and the circumstance that her body had been covered, that Vincow had been dead four to five hours when her body was discovered. The victims' daughter later identified several pieces of her parents' jewelry that police had recovered from Felipe Solano, who had purchased them from defendant. 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 On January 30, 1989, the court again asked defendant whether he preferred wearing a leg brace that would not be visible to the jury, rather than leg chains. WebVincent and Maxine Zazzara Richard invaded the Zazzara home. Turns out, the chief of police had never told her to not release it. A .22-caliber bullet recovered from Ms. Kneiding's brain had been fired from the same gun that fired the bullets that killed Dale Okazaki and Tsai-Lian Yu. I will be avenged. 5, 273 Cal.Rptr. The jury reasonably could have concluded that defendant acted with malice because he intentionally shot Yu twice at close range without provocation and acted with an abandoned and malignant heart. ), Defendant argues the death penalty statute in effect at the time of defendant's trial permitted capricious infliction of punishment under the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the federal Constitution because it permitted the jury to consider the same facts in determining defendant's guilt of the charged offenses, the truth of the special circumstance allegations, and the proper penalty. You can see Satan on my arm. Defendant moved his shirt sleeve to reveal a pentagram drawn on his left shoulder. According to defendant, this led the jury to treat the absence of mitigation as aggravation. If defendant believed the pattern instruction was unclear, he had the obligation to request clarifying language. (People v. Rodrigues (1994) 8 Cal.4th 1060, 1192, 36 Cal.Rptr.2d 235, 885 P.2d 1.) Defendant took Carol K. to her bedroom, put the gun to her head and threatened to kill her, then tied her hands behind her with a pair of pantyhose. As defendant drove past Gallegos, Gallegos could see his profile and noted the license number of defendant's vehicle. 12. 1, 38 Cal.Rptr.2d 394, 889 P.2d 588. She fell to the ground and lay still while defendant entered the condominium. And also there will be a coroner's photograph of Mrs. Zazzara. This court cannot guarantee that such result will not happen anyway; it can only attempt to safeguard against it. The court stated that it had informed Mr. Ramirez that neither Daniel Hernandez nor Arturo Hernandez have the legal experience which would qualify them to be appointed by this court to represent him in this case, nor do either attorney meet the qualifications set forth by the Los Angeles County Bar for the indigent criminal defense appointment panel.. You are admonished in the strongest possible terms that your decision in this case must be based on the evidence that you have seen and heard in this courtroom and from no other source. The court then instructed the jury to begin its deliberations anew. However, it is also the view of the court that the defendant should be fully informed regarding his choice of counsel, so that he may make his decision knowingly and intelligently. ), 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. (b).) Defendant returned to the living room and brought Somkid K. into the bedroom, threatening to kill her children if she resisted. The survey revealed that 94.3 percent of those who responded had heard of the case and 52.7 percent were able to recall something about defendant, such as that he was a Satanist or that he looked evil or mean. As defendant recognizes, we repeatedly have rejected this claim. For the reasons that follow, the judgment is affirmed. 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. The high court ruled that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant's request to substitute counsel, stating, where a court justifiably finds an actual conflict of interest, there can be no doubt that it may decline a proffer of waiver, and insist that defendants be separately represented. (Id. 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. 618, 545 P.2d 1322, fn. A criminalist testified that it was uncertain whether semen collected from Sakina A. could be matched to defendant. They were also concerned he was a copy cat of Charles Manson. WebOn March 28, 1985, about 8:30 p.m., Polo went to the home that Vincent Zazzara shared with his wife Maxine to deliver the days receipts from the restaurant and found the screen door unlocked and the front door ajar. The Defendant: I don't want to go to no hospital, Ma'am.. The court concluded: I don't think that a reasonable likelihood has been made out that a fair trial cannot be had in this county, adding, You know, of course, that if a panel is brought in and if you go through the panel and the voir dire experience shows that the panel is, in fact, rather than in theory, polluted, that you can make another motion for change of venue at that time., Section 1033 provides that a defendant's motion for change of venue shall be granted when it appears that there is a reasonable likelihood that a fair and impartial trial cannot be had in the county. (1033, subd. 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. Defendant compared that percentage to both the percentage of jury-eligible Hispanics living in the judicial district in which the trial was held (26.3 percent) and the percentage of jury-eligible Hispanics living within a 20-mile radius from the courthouse (17.5 percent). (People v. Panah, supra, 35 Cal.4th 395, 449, 25 Cal.Rptr.3d 672, 107 P.3d 790; People v. Coffman and Marlow (2004) 34 Cal.4th 1, 46, 17 Cal.Rptr.3d 710, 96 P.3d 30.) Because the jury was instructed to determine only whether defendant entered the residence with the specific intent to commit larceny, we do not consider whether the evidence that Okazaki was found with her blouse pulled up would have supported a finding that defendant entered the residence with intent to commit a sexual offense. Defendant cites People v. Lucky (1988) 45 Cal.3d 259, 302, 247 Cal.Rptr. The foreperson replied, I feel that we can probably continue today, adding that [e]veryone appears to have put it behind them. The court stated that it was reasonably satisfied that the jurors are able to proceed with their deliberations and that upon further admonishment I propose that that is exactly what we do. Defendant objected. [Defense Counsel]: And you agree with the tactical decision that we made not to put on any evidence at this stage of the proceeding? [] So the point I am trying to make to you is this: you may file and lodge all of the cassettes you wish, all those that you have, but I don't think that in my discretion that it is a judicious use of my time to sit there and watch them all. The evidence is sufficient to support defendant's convictions for burglary of the Hernandez/Okazaki residence, felony-murder of Okazaki based upon the commission of the burglary, and the special circumstance that the murder of Okazaki was committed during the commission of a burglary. U. S. Okazaki had been shot to death in the head from close range. 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. (Ante, 46 Cal.Rptr.3d at pp. Defendant contends 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 trial counsel to withdraw the request, it merely asked him to do so after explaining why the court concluded the proposed instruction was improper. Telephone: (608)-835-3101. [] The Court: I don't think there is any doubt but that that is true, and I accept that that is true. The court then admitted several exhibits without foundation, stating: I've got to have some kind of record.. This court fully recognizes that the defendant has the right to retained counsel of his choice at all stages of the proceedings against him. 191, 800 P.2d 547, retained private counsel, but his first trial ended in a mistrial and he became indigent prior to the retrial. Mr. One juror made no response. In the early days of his crimes, he knocked on the car hood of Maria Hernandez so she would see him before the attack, and he yanked Tsai-Lian Veronica Yu out of her car as opposed to shooting her through the window. A blood sample recovered from the house in which Mary Cannon was murdered differed from defendant's blood type. Books and papers were strewn around the room. During his testimony regarding the murder of Tsai Lian Yu, eyewitness Jorge Gallegos identified defendant, but added the observation, he's just a little different, explaining, his hair is just a little longer. On cross-examination, the following exchange occurred: [Defense Counsel]: the man at the trial looks different than the man you saw that night. The Night Stalker kept himself under control for almost a year, but on March 17, 1985, at approximately 11:30 P.M., he struck again. The juror's death had no connection to the present case and it is not apparent from the record that anything in the media accounts of the juror's murder would have affected the jury's deliberations. Defendant expressly does not raise an assignment of error as to counsel's conflicts of interest with respect to the retainer agreements, preferring to raise this issue in a subsequent petition for writ of habeas corpus. 81, 7, p. He then removed the handcuffs from Carol K., handcuffed her son behind his back, and put him in a closet. The Court: All right. [Citation.] Defendant contends that the circumstance that he was restrained by leg shackles deprived him of his due process and fair trial rights under the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution., On the first day of jury selection, July 21, 1988, the court informed counsel outside the hearing of the jury that the bailiff reported that defendant was unhappy wearing a leg brace. 6, 20 Cal.Rptr.2d 638, 853 P.2d 1093. Sakina A. untied her son, called in vain for her husband, and screamed for help. [] [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. 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.. A restraining device similar to handcuffs that attach to the subject's thumbs. Its headlights were on and the driver's side door was open. In any event, we repeatedly have held that instructions in the language of CALJIC No. He told her to be quiet, asked, Where is it? and then shot her in the face. 503, 781 P.2d 537, fn. 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. The Court: Would you like him to stand? Strand testified that the levels of recognition and predisposition were the highest he had ever seen. Richard Ramirez broke into the home of Vincent and Maxine Zazzara at around 2 a.m. on March 27, 1985. It simply isn't proving anything. The point is that what you are presenting is cumulative and repetitive and it isn't proving anything. (People v. Saunders, supra, 5 Cal.4th 580, 589, 590, 20 Cal.Rptr.2d 638, 853 P.2d 1093.) Evidence Code section 1101, subdivision (b), permits the admission of evidence that a person committed a crime when relevant to prove some fact (such as intent ) other than his or her disposition to commit such an act. In order to be relevant to prove intent, the other crime must be sufficiently similar to support the inference that the defendant probably harbor[ed] the same intent in each instance. [Citations. Defendant has presented no persuasive reason to reconsider our previous holdings. 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.. Substantial evidence is evidence that raises a reasonable doubt about the defendant's competence to stand trial. [Citation.] While in jail awaiting trial, defendant used his blood to draw a pentagram on the floor and write the number 666. He further contends that these instructions and argument rendered the penalty determination unreliable, in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the federal Constitution. 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. And I beg you to remember that in your deliberations. The court then selected an alternate juror to replace Juror Singletary and released the jury for the day, ordering them to return the following day and repeating the admonition to not allow yourself any exposure to any media representation about this case.. HUG, Circuit Judge: 204. 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. I do wish to impress upon you the importance of Mr. Ramirez being in the contract, and that has to have prime consideration. [Citation. When he and Daniel Hernandez were seeking to be substituted as counsel for defendant, Arturo Hernandez stated they had entered into a written contract with defendant, adding: Also, the other parties that have retained us, his family, who are also liable, have acquired some financial responsibility to us due to that contract. The court had the exchange with defendant, which is quoted above, in which defendant stated he had read and understood the contract. WebMaxine Zazzara was born on May 15, 1940 in Arkansas, USA. Curiously, defendant cites our decision in Drumgo v. Superior Court (1973) 8 Cal.3d 930, 106 Cal.Rptr. Defendant blindfolded and gagged the victim before ransacking the bedroom, demanding money and jewelry. The Court: Did you have any questions regarding any of the conditions in that contract? After quoting the pertinent language from section 190.3, factor (a), as reflected in CALJIC No. Calif.Only that it has something to do with the Night Stalker and that was revealed in the courtroom by the judge.He's accused of a feloney [sic]., 6. Prospective Juror Robert D[. Nor, contrary to defendant's claim, do the high court's decisions in Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000) 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. Defendant entered holding a gun and ordered her to be quiet. And both of these groups of charges were linked to the Sophie D. and Carol K. charges-which defendant asserted in the trial court should be tried separately-because defendant sold to Felipe Solano property stolen during crimes included in each of these groups. So long as it considered the evidence offered at the guilt phase of trial solely for this purpose, the jury was entitled to take into account all of the evidence offered at the guilt phase as part of the circumstances of the crime, an aggravating factor that the jury may consider in its penalty deliberations. The Defendant: I understand. I also have seen him not quite as attentive as a result of his dozing off. Can he stand? But one political figure would make a damming mistake later on. 2. jake randall scarlets rugby; masshealth staff directory. 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.. Family (2) See also Other Works | Publicity Listings | Official Sites View agent, publicist, legal and company contact details on IMDbPro Mr. Serial Killer Database Wiki. Failure to Narrow Class of Death-eligible Defendants, Defendant contends that the death penalty statute applicable in this case failed to meaningfully narrow the class of defendants eligible for the death penalty, in violation of the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the federal Constitution. [Citations. He placed the receipts in the mail slot, as was his usual practice, and left. lihtc compliance checklist. The court stated: The court finds that the defendant's waiver of his right to testify and his waiver of the right to put on evidence during the penalty phase, these waivers have been freely, voluntarily and intelligently made and joined in by his counsel., A.Pretrial Issues1. ] [Citation. The Sixth Amendment commands that the accused be defended by the counsel he believes to be best. (United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez, supra, 548 U.S. at ----, 126 S.Ct. ), In any event, we did not hold in Williams that the area within a 20-mile-radius area of the courthouse could not be used as the relevant community for this purpose. They never were able to find the shoes after that. at p. 742, 263 Cal.Rptr. ), A trial court's denial of a motion for severance may be reversed only if the court has abused its discretion. Before dawn on May 30, 1985, Carol K. was awakened in her Burbank home by defendant. As the four-part test is stated in the conjunctive, joinder may be appropriate even though the evidence is not cross-admissible (People v. Ochoa (2001) 26 Cal.4th 398, 423, 110 Cal.Rptr.2d 324, 28 P.3d 78.). 720, 807 P.2d 949, disapproved on other grounds in People v. Stansbury (1995) 9 Cal.4th 824, 830, fn. WebPlease click on a location below to view an address and phone number. The present case does not involve concurrent representation of multiple defendants as in Holloway and Sullivan, or even prior representation of the victim as in Mickens. All the channels had the same kind of mixture of hard news and fluff, and I don't see any point in sitting here watching, you know, all of the channels. Five persons linked to this address. The court noted that the brace was less obtrusive than leg chains and thus to defendant's advantage. In addition, in the County of Los Angeles no juror shall be required to serve at a distance greater than 20 miles from his or her residence. (Stats.1980, ch. The court finds that although I gave Mr. And this turned out to be the case. IMDbPro Starmeter See rank. [Citation. WebVincent Zazzara was born on October 8, 1920. 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. 12, 127 Cal.Rptr. You maggots made me sick. The Court: I think this is an area that I would not and in fact I am bound not to bring forth unless the jury itself raises the question during their deliberations. Holding a news conference, she held up a police sketch of the killer, and also went on to describe the evidence from all the cases throughout the state crucial information that hadnt been made public. About 3:30 a.m. that same morning, July 7, 1985, Sophie D. awoke in her home in Monterey Park before dawn when the bedroom light went on. The Court: Do you understand it is not the court's desire in any way to change any of the terms of this contract; it is only my desire to make sure you understand those terms and any potential problems that these terms may create; all I want to know is that you do understand? As noted above, the in camera hearing concluded, and Arturo Hernandez and Daniel Hernandez were substituted as counsel without the court ordering a psychiatric evaluation of defendant. Nothing in the record before us supports the conclusion that defendant's chances of receiving a fair trial were irreparably damaged. As defendant recognizes, we have repeatedly rejected this contention. Later he gouged out Maxine's eyes and took them with him. (190.3, factor (a).) (1239, subd. As you are aware I am sure, he tends to catnap during the day. was asleep or dozing or catnapping or doing something other than paying rapt attention to the proceedings. The jury returned a verdict of death at 11:00 a.m. 191, 800 P.2d 547, this Court held that both Daniel Hernandez and Arturo Hernandez should properly have been discharged by the trial court as retained counsel on the defendant's motion based on their incompetence in a pending murder case. This does not accurately describe our decision in Ortiz. The prosecutor suggested that defendant again wear a leg brace rather than leg chains.
Bryan And Brie Bella Net Worth,
Articles M