People v. Bradford

Citation65 Cal.Rptr.2d 145,939 P.2d 259,15 Cal.4th 1229
Decision Date14 July 1997
Docket NumberNo. S005707,S005707
Parties, 939 P.2d 259, 97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5537, 97 Daily Journal D.A.R. 8941, 97 Daily Journal D.A.R. 9003 The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Bill BRADFORD, Defendant and Appellant.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court (California)

Page 157

David A. Nickerson, under appointment by the Supreme Court, San Rafael, for Defendant and Appellant.

Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General, George Williamson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Carol Wendelin Pollack, Assistant Attorney General, William T. Harter, Susan Lee Frierson and David F. Glassman, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Page 158

GEORGE, Chief Justice.

Following the guilt and special circumstance phase of a capital trial, a jury found defendant Bill Bradford guilty of the first degree murders of Shari Miller and Tracey Campbell. Pen.Code §§ 187, 189. 1 The jury also found true the special circumstance that defendant had committed multiple murder. (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(3).)

Following the penalty phase of the trial, the jury imposed the death penalty. After denying defendant's motion for modification of the verdict imposing the death penalty, the court sentenced defendant to death for the murders of Shari Miller and Tracey Campbell. This appeal is automatic. (§ 1239, subd. (b).) We affirm the judgment in its entirety.

I. FACTS

The evidence at trial established that between July 4 and July 6, 1984, defendant killed Shari Miller in a remote desert area, stored her body in the trunk of his vehicle for a number of hours, and then deposited her body in a parking lot in West Los Angeles, where it was discovered on the morning of July 6, 1984. The evidence also established that on July 12, 1984, defendant drove Tracey Campbell to the same remote desert area, where he killed her that day or the following day. On this occasion defendant left the body at the desert site, where it was discovered on August 11, 1984.

A. GUILT PHASE EVIDENCE
1. Disappearance of Shari Miller

Defendant became acquainted with Nicholas (Nick) Klos in 1982. Klos often camped in a horseshoe-shaped "bowl area" in an isolated part of the desert near Lancaster, south of Edwards Air Force Base, and on two weekends in April 1983, Klos and defendant, accompanied by others, had driven their motorhomes to that site. Approximately one week prior to July 4, 1984, defendant contacted Klos and inquired whether he intended to go to the bowl area on July 4, 1984. Approximately one week later, defendant again contacted Klos and asked for directions to the bowl area.

Shari Miller, who was 21 years of age, lately had been residing in her automobile. She was acquainted with Marcia Peltier and Michael Faddis. In late June 1984, Faddis, who sometimes recovered used but undamaged clothing from trash containers, had given Shari a blouse with a snail print on it. During June, Shari had given Faddis a double-bladed knife in a double sheath that she desired to sell. Near the end of June, Faddis returned the knife to her because he had been unable to sell it for her.

In late June 1984, Shari had shown her mother, Mara Lyn Miller, a ring decorated with a carved head of an "Indian chief." At that time Shari wore her hair long. On June 29, Shari telephoned her mother from Daniel Freeman Memorial Hospital, telling her that, while in the shower, she had received a bad cut requiring five stitches on her left arm just below the elbow. Shari, wearing a bandage on her arm, arrived at her mother's residence that night, remaining overnight.

Approximately 2:20 p.m. on Saturday, June 30, Mrs. Miller overheard Shari place a telephone call and address someone as "Bill," telling him she was sorry she had missed him the week before and inquiring whether the job still was available. Afterward, Shari informed her mother that she was going to have a job posing for a photographer, modeling leather jackets and boots for "In The Wind" magazine. Telephone records subsequently confirmed that a telephone call had been made from the Miller residence to defendant's residence at 2:22 p.m. on June 30. Mrs. Miller saw her daughter for the last time when Mrs. Miller left the residence approximately 3:00 p.m. on the afternoon of June 30.

On the afternoon of July 1, Shari met her friend Carolyn Bury and told her that she was looking forward to the opportunity within the next week to model leather outfits for a photographer who "had a lot of money," lived on a boat in the Marina, and owned a motorcycle. The photographer would provide the clothing, and Shari "made it very

Page 159

clear that there wouldn't be any nude shots." Bury previously had observed that Shari had three tattoos: Harley-Davidson Motorcycle "Wings" on her left ankle, Winnie the Pooh on her abdomen close to her pubic hair, and an "S" on the bottom of her foot. Shari wore her hair long. Bury had noticed Shari wearing a silver ring made from a spoon.

On the night of July 1 or early on the morning of July 2, Shari, wearing cut-off jeans and a sleeveless top, arrived at a residence where Marcia Peltier was staying. Between 9:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. on July 2, the two women made lists of things they planned to do that day. Shari's list included the notation: "Bill Bradford, Meat Market, 6:00 p.m." Shari mentioned an upcoming modeling job. At approximately 11:00 a.m., Kurt Androsky, a house painter who recently had become acquainted with Shari, arrived. Androsky, who did not have transportation that day and who knew Shari wanted a job, inquired whether she would assist in the completion of a house-painting job at a residence in the San Fernando Valley. She accepted and, driving her vehicle, left with Kurt to go to the job site.

During their drive to that location, Androsky, a narcotics user, injected methamphetamine, and Shari attempted to do so but was unsuccessful. Androsky and Shari arrived between 11:00 a.m. and noon and painted the building for six or seven hours, using yellow paint. Beverly Holst, the owner of the residence, recalled that on a date within several days of July 4, when Holst returned from work, she noticed that Androsky was employing a female assistant dressed in a tank top and cut-off jeans. Holst observed in the driveway a brown or blue vehicle similar in size to a Dodge Dart. The back seat of the vehicle was filled with miscellaneous items.

Androsky and Shari departed at approximately 6:30 p.m. and proceeded to the Meat Market, a bar in West Los Angeles. Shari mentioned to Androsky that she had an offer to model for a photographer, using motorcycles as props, on the following day. After Shari made a telephone call, the photographer arrived at the bar. Shari introduced the man but Androsky was unable to identify defendant as the man he had met. Shari dropped off Androsky in Venice at approximately 9:00 p.m. that evening.

Schylee O'Hare, a bartender at the Meat Market bar, was acquainted both with defendant and Shari, a former employee at that bar. At approximately noon on July 3, Schylee waited on the sidewalk for the bar to open. Shari drove up, exited from her vehicle, and asked Schylee for a dime, stating she was going to telephone defendant, who had arranged to take photographs of her. Schylee observed that Shari was wearing a tank top, jeans, and leather moccasins that laced up to the knee. 2

Evans Haas had become acquainted with defendant at the Meat Market bar in early June, and also previously had met Shari. Just before noon on Tuesday, July 3 or Wednesday, July 4 (he was not certain which date), Haas visited defendant's apartment on Midvale Avenue in Los Angeles to inspect a motorcycle that defendant had offered for sale. Approximately one hour later, Shari, wearing long jeans, arrived at defendant's apartment.

Defendant's motorcycle was not functioning properly, and at approximately 2:00 p.m., Haas and defendant took one of the motorcycle parts to Bartels Harley Davidson shop in Culver City. The shop was open, and defendant had a conversation with an employee concerning the part, which purportedly had been repaired. 3 When defendant and Haas

Page 160

returned to the apartment, Shari was asleep inside defendant's automobile. Defendant asked Haas to stand holding a bottle of liquor next to Shari and took a Polaroid photograph of them. Approximately 45 minutes later, at 2:30 p.m., Haas departed.

Gary Williams, who together with his mother, Olga Talbot, shared the apartment on Midvale Avenue with defendant, was introduced to Shari on that day. Williams recalled driving in and out of the garage as Haas and defendant worked on the motorcycle. Although Williams testified at trial that the date was July 1, relying upon the circumstance that he had not gone to work that day, he was impeached with his preliminary hearing testimony indicating that the date was July 3 and with his employment records demonstrating that he had not worked on July 3.

At approximately 5:00 p.m. on July 3 or 4 (he was uncertain which date), Todd Heidrick, a cousin of Tracey Campbell, who had become acquainted with defendant, was walking along Midvale Avenue in Los Angeles on his way to West Hollywood. Defendant drove up in his automobile and agreed to give Todd a ride. Defendant was accompanied by someone whom he introduced at the time as "Shari," whom Todd later identified from photographs.

At approximately 6:00 p.m. on July 3, Shari arrived at the residence of Oliver De la Torre, with whom she had become romantically involved the previous month. She spent the evening but departed at 1:00 a.m. on July 4. Appearing to be apprehensive, Shari told De La Torre that she had agreed to meet someone at a bar but did not want to go to the meeting. She asked De La Torre to leave the door unlocked, because she would return during the night, but she failed to return.

Olga Talbot later told the police that, on July 4, she awoke at 4:30 a.m., as was her custom. On her...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1723 cases
  • People v. Molano
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • 27 Junio 2019
    ...of Miranda ." ( People v. Davis (2009) 46 Cal.4th 539, 586, 94 Cal.Rptr.3d 322, 208 P.3d 78 ; see People v. Bradford (1997) 15 Cal.4th 1229, 1311, 65 Cal.Rptr.2d 145, 939 P.2d 259 ( Bradford ).)Defendant gave three taped statements to law enforcement officers. The first was made at San Quen......
  • People v. Mickel
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • 19 Diciembre 2016
    ...United States Constitution, a criminal defendant has the right to testify on his or her own behalf. (People v. Bradford (1997) 15 Cal.4th 1229, 1332, 65 Cal.Rptr.2d 145, 939 P.2d 259 ; People v. Robles (1970) 2 Cal.3d 205, 215, 85 Cal.Rptr. 166, 466 P.2d 710.) These constitutional due proce......
  • People v. Henderson
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • 30 Julio 2020
    ...that the verdict would have been more favorable to defendant had [the] statements not been admitted." ( People v. Bradford (1997) 15 Cal.4th 1229, 1314, 65 Cal.Rptr.2d 145, 939 P.2d 259.) Because confessions " ‘[a]lmost invariably’ will provide persuasive evidence of a defendant's guilt .........
  • People v. Gallardo
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • 6 Diciembre 2017
    ...pertaining to ... uncharged offenses, as to which the Sixth Amendment right has not yet attached[.]" ( People v. Bradford (1997) 15 Cal.4th 1229, 1313, 65 Cal.Rptr.2d 145, 939 P.2d 259 ; see also Maine v. Moulton (1985) 474 U.S. 159, 180, 106 S.Ct. 477, 88 L.Ed.2d 481.) Given the Legislatur......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
15 books & journal articles
  • Table of cases
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books California Drunk Driving Law - Volume 1-2 Appendices
    • 30 Marzo 2022
    ...- PE - California Drunk Driving Law F-24 People v. Bracken (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th Supp. 1, §7:20.7, Appendix E People v. Bradford (1997) 15 Cal.4th 1229, §9:93.2 People v. Bradford (2007) 154 Cal.App.4th 1390, §9:92 People v. Bradley (1984) 159 Cal.App.3d 399, §9:114.4.3 People v. Bradus (20......
  • Chapter 5 - §3. Exceptions to warrant requirement
    • United States
    • Full Court Press California Guide to Criminal Evidence Chapter 5 Exclusion of Evidence on Constitutional Grounds
    • Invalid date
    ...v. Dickerson (1993) 508 U.S. 366, 375; Hicks, 480 U.S. at 326; Texas v. Brown (1983) 460 U.S. 730, 741-42; People v. Bradford (1997) 15 Cal.4th 1229, 1294; see, e.g., Horton, 496 U.S. at 142 (upholding seizure of weapons when officer had probable cause to believe they had been used in crime......
  • Table of Cases null
    • United States
    • Full Court Press California Guide to Criminal Evidence Table of Cases
    • Invalid date
    ...People v. Brackins, 37 Cal. App. 5th 56, 249 Cal. Rptr. 3d 261 (6th Dist. 2019)—Ch. 4-A, §7.1.1(2) People v. Bradford, 15 Cal. 4th 1229, 65 Cal. Rptr. 2d 145, 939 P.2d 259 (1997)—Ch. 1, §4.3; Ch. 2, §4.1.1(2); §7.1; Ch. 4-C, §2.5.2(2)(c)[1][b]; Ch. 5-A, §2.2.1(1)(b)[5]; §3.1.2(3)(c)[1]; §4.......
  • Chapter 1 - §4. Relevance of specific evidence
    • United States
    • Full Court Press California Guide to Criminal Evidence Chapter 1 Relevance
    • Invalid date
    ...for the purpose of showing how an incident occurred and testing the veracity of a witness's testimony. People v. Bradford (1997) 15 Cal.4th 1229, 1326-27; People v. Turner (1994) 8 Cal.4th 137, 198, disapproved on other grounds, People v. Griffin (2004) 33 Cal.4th 536; see, e.g., People v. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT