State v. Granados
| Citation | 451 P.3d 289 |
| Decision Date | 26 September 2019 |
| Docket Number | No. 20180055-CA,20180055-CA |
| Parties | STATE of Utah, Appellee, v. Joseph Crescencio GRANADOS, Appellant. |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Utah |
Nathalie S. Skibine, Nick Falcone, and Sherry Valdez, Attorneys for Appellant
Sean D. Reyes, Salt Lake City, and Lindsey L. Wheeler, Attorneys for Appellee
Opinion
¶1 Joseph Crescencio Granados appeals his convictions arising from events surrounding a shooting and a subsequent police chase. A jury convicted Granados on all charges filed against him based on those events. On appeal, Granados challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the convictions specifically related to the shooting: attempted murder, possession of a dangerous weapon by a restricted person, and criminal mischief. In addition, during the trial the district court disqualified one of the jurors (Juror 16) for sleeping. Granados argues that the court violated rule 17(g) of the Utah Rules of Criminal Procedure by replacing Juror 16, over counsel's objection and without questioning her. We affirm, concluding that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict related to the shooting and that the district court did not violate rule 17(g) by disqualifying Juror 16 without first questioning her.
¶2 One afternoon, as the victim (Victim) drove home from work, he noticed a "maroon" Chevy Malibu (Malibu) ahead of him "swerving all over the place." From Victim's vantage point, he observed that the Malibu's driver—an individual the jury later determined to be Granados—was the only occupant of the car. The Malibu eventually pulled into a right-turn lane, at which point Victim "went to pass it." As Victim did so, he observed the Malibu's driver touch the roof of the car and noticed that the driver's arm "had tattoos." After Victim passed the Malibu, it "jumped in right behind" Victim's car and inexplicably began "aggressively" following Victim, "right on [his] bumper." Victim did not recognize the Malibu and from his rearview mirror was able to observe only that the car's driver was "Hispanic."
¶3 Concerned about being so aggressively followed and wanting to "get somewhere where maybe [he] could get some help," Victim decided to drive to the home of a highway patrolman he knew. As Victim turned left, Granados drew alongside him and "pulled a gun." Victim "slammed [on] the brakes," backed up his vehicle, turned down another road, and attempted to lose Granados. However, Granados "turned around and started chasing" Victim, at which point Victim called 911.
¶4 While Victim was on the phone, the Malibu hit Victim's car on the "right passenger side," causing it to "sway, skid and lose control," hit a parked SUV, and land on the front lawn of a townhome. After Victim's vehicle "came to a stop on the lawn," Granados opened fire, shooting ten rounds at Victim. One of the bullets grazed Victim's neck. Granados then fled in the Malibu.
¶5 Several witnesses observed the shooting. One witness (Witness One), a resident of the neighborhood, went outside after hearing four consecutive gunshots. She observed a "red car" down the street, "[r]ight in front of [the] townhomes," and then heard "maybe four or five more shots." At that point, the red car "made a U-turn" and went "right past" her. As it did, Witness One saw that the car was "crushed in on the passenger's side at the front" and that it had a "white license plate" and a "baby on board" "triangle" in the back window.
¶6 Another witness (Witness Two) was driving in the same area at the time. She observed a "maroon" car hit Victim's car, which then landed on the grass "facing a townhome." She then observed the car's driver pull a gun and shoot at Victim's car. While Witness Two did not see who was driving, she did observe that the driver was the only person in the car.
¶7 Yet another witness (Witness Three) was also driving in the area. Witness Three saw a "red car" with damage and another car "up on the grass with the whole passenger side caved in." As she drove slowly past both cars, she made eye contact with the red car's driver and described him as having "a round face," "really dark eyes," "short, really dark hair," and "a mustache." Witness Three then saw the driver raise a gun and start shooting at the car on the lawn, testifying that the driver "[j]ust kept firing." Witness Three continued to drive, but in her rearview mirror observed the red car "flip a U-ey" in her direction, veer around her, and run a red light. As it did, she observed "a piece of his car fly off in the intersection." Police later recovered a headlight at that intersection. Witness Three followed the red car and called 911. On a side street she then witnessed the car's driver stop, get out of the car, pick up the front bumper that had fallen off, and put it in the car.
¶8 Police were advised of the shooting incident at 4:13 p.m., almost as soon as it occurred, and immediately began a search for the Malibu. Granados was apprehended and taken into custody approximately two and a half hours later, at 6:55 p.m.
¶9 Notably, the day before the shooting, police were already attempting to locate Granados and the Malibu. The Malibu belonged to Granados's girlfriend (Girlfriend), and she had reported to police that the vehicle was missing and that Granados likely had it. Girlfriend's Malibu was maroon and had a triangular yellow "baby-on-board" sticker in the back window. Later that day, an officer (Officer One) saw the vehicle, pulled "up on the side of it," and confirmed that Granados was "actually inside the vehicle," observing that Granados was the vehicle's only occupant. When Officer One attempted to pull Granados over, Granados fled and Officer One broke off pursuit.
¶10 On the day of the shooting, several police officers assisted in apprehending Granados.
An officer (Officer Two) spotted Granados in the Malibu at approximately 6:15 p.m. He observed that the Malibu had "front-end damage" and that Granados was the vehicle's sole occupant. Officer Two radioed other officers about Granados's location and followed him for several miles, but eventually lost sight of him.
¶11 Upon receiving information that Officer Two had located Granados, a different officer (Officer Three) proceeded to a nearby location to create a containment of the area. As he did, he saw the Malibu drive right by him and also identified Granados as the driver. Along with other officers, Officer Three engaged in pursuit, following Granados through surface streets and the freeway for over twelve minutes, at times reaching speeds of approximately 95 miles per hour.
¶12 Granados eventually abandoned the Malibu in the middle of the road next to a "small apartment building" and fled on foot, but he was apprehended and arrested shortly thereafter.
¶13 Following Granados's arrest, police searched the Malibu that Granados had abandoned in the road following the high-speed chase. The Malibu had a yellow baby-on-board sign in the back window, and the license plate matched that of Girlfriend's car. The Malibu's exterior also had extensive damage. Among other things, the car was missing the front bumper and a headlight, and the missing bumper was discovered in the car's back seat. Inside the car, officers also discovered glass shards and, on the driver's side floorboard, two live rounds, .32 caliber and .40 caliber, and ten spent .40 caliber casings.
¶14 Officers also recovered physical evidence from the shooting scene. Crime scene technicians identified markings and holes consistent with ten rounds—eight in Victim's car, one creating a trail on the sidewalk and lawn next to Victim's car, and one in the exterior of the townhome in front of Victim's car. Crime scene technicians ultimately recovered five slugs—four from Victim's car and one on the porch of the nearby townhome. Each slug was consistent with a .40 caliber bullet. Crime scene technicians also recovered glass shards that were consistent with those discovered in the back seat of the Malibu.
¶15 Technicians conducted tests on certain evidence collected from the Malibu. First, technicians processed the front bumper for fingerprints. A partial palm print was recovered but did not match Granados. A technician also collectively processed the bullets and bullet casings for DNA, soaking each casing and bullet individually in a buffer solution and then pouring the buffer solution through a filter designed to "catch a cell where the DNA is stored." The technician poured the buffer solution for each casing and bullet through the same filter. The filter was then taken to a lab for analysis, and the analyst concluded that Granados was the major contributor to the DNA collected by the filter.
¶16 Additionally, two days after the events, police showed Witness Three a photo array that included Granados. Witness Three did not select Granados as the person she observed in the shooting, but she indicated that the photo she selected "resemble[d]" the driver and that she was not positive that it was driver of the red car. Nevertheless, the photo she selected fit the description she provided to police.
¶17 The State charged Granados with, among other things, attempted murder, possession of a firearm by a restricted person, failure to stop at the command of police, and criminal mischief.2 The case proceeded to trial. At the close of the State's case, Granados moved for a directed verdict on the charges related to the shooting incident. He argued that while there was sufficient evidence that he drove the Malibu during the police chase following the shooting incident, the State had not provided sufficient evidence to establish his identity as the shooter. The district court denied the motion, explaining that there had been "quite substantial evidence" from which the jury could infer that Granados ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Law
...judge of both the credibility of witnesses and the weight to be given particular evidence." State v. Granados , 2019 UT App 158, ¶ 28, 451 P.3d 289 (cleaned up). Simply put, that the jury weighed the evidence differently than Law believes it should have is not enough to persuade us that the......
-
State v. Sundara
...We review a court's decision to replace a juror with an alternate for abuse of discretion. Cf. State v. Granados , 2019 UT App 158, ¶ 39, 451 P.3d 289 (explaining, in the context of discussing how to handle sleeping jurors, that "district courts have considerable discretion in determining h......
-
State v. Holsomback
...the appellate court, is the exclusive judge of ... the weight to be given particular evidence." State v. Granados , 2019 UT App 158, ¶ 28, 451 P.3d 289 (cleaned up). "And a jury is not obligated to believe the evidence most favorable to the defendant, nor does the existence of contradictory......
-
State v. Hosman
...evidence or of conflicting inferences warrant disturbing the jury's verdict on appeal." State v. Granados , 2019 UT App 158, ¶ 28, 451 P.3d 289 (cleaned up). "Thus, we will reverse a jury verdict only when the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the jury's verdict, is sufficient......