People v. Bell
| Court | California Court of Appeals |
| Writing for the Court | Banke, J. |
| Decision Date | 14 October 2020 |
| Docket Number | A154231 |
| Citation | People v. Bell, A154231 (Cal. App. Oct 14, 2020) |
| Parties | THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LEE OTHA BELL, Defendant and Appellant. |
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
Defendant Lee Otha Bell appeals from a judgment of conviction by jury of one count of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a)). On appeal, he contends: (1) the trial court erred in admitting testimony regarding certain DNA evidence; (2) the trial court erroneously instructed the jury as to evidence of prior domestic violence and erred in refusing to instruct on manslaughter; (3) there was insufficient evidence of premeditation and deliberation necessary for first degree murder; (4) the trial court erred in imposing a restitution fine without a hearing on his ability to pay (People v. Dueñas (2019) 30 Cal.App.5th 1157 (Dueñas)).
We affirm.
From 2008 to 2010, defendant and the victim engaged in a tumultuous relationship. During that time, the victim was treated at UCSF hospital for various domestic-violence related injuries.
In March 2009, the victim was "treated for some head pain, knee pain, and . . . some abrasions" after she was "assaulted" and "kicked in the head" by "[h]er partner." She had a "cast on her right arm" and a cut which she also said "was from her partner." She had "throbbing pain" and "bruising to her head." Police interviewed her and noted she had a bump on her head, "her arm was bandaged up," and she had a "cut or bleeding on her knee" and a "small cut on the hand." The victim said her "then-boyfriend Lee Bell" approached her and "punched her in the head six times with a closed fist." After she fell to the ground, "he then kicked her two times" and "took a pair of scissors, held it to her cheek, and said, 'If you go to the police I'll kill you.' " The injury on her hand had occurred "four days prior" and "was another injury that occurred from Mr. Bell." The officers took photographs of the victim's injuries, filed a report, and called for an emergency protective order.
Four months later, in July, the victim "presented to the emergency room" by ambulance with "shortness of breath, bloody stools, [and] abdominal pain." She had what is known as " 'racoon eyes,' " which is "bruising around" both of the eyes." She told the nurse and physician assistant on duty her "injuries were due to domestic violence" and that they "were caused by her boyfriend." She was diagnosed as having "two facial fractures" located at her "right zygomatic arch and her right internal orbital bone."
In September, the victim once again presented at UCSF, this time with "shortness of breath." After police arrived, she informed officers "she had been choked."
The following month, the victim was "admitted to the hospital primarily with complaints of cough and fever and difficulty breathing." She reported that she had "been assaulted" a week prior. She had been "chokedaround the neck" by "her partner, and a subsequent examination showed "evidence of bruising along the lower part of her neck."
Early the next year, in January 2010, the victim was taken to UCSF by ambulance. She "was wheezing, and she was throwing up," and she had a "laceration on her . . . head" and complained of "pain to her entire rib cage" and "pain in her throat." She stated she had "been assaulted," "punched in the ribs" and "punched in the face," "hit on the head and she was choked." She reported her pain was a "10-out-of-10." She informed police she "was attempting to break up with him or get away" from her boyfriend for the past "month and-a-half," and "she believed he was going to kill her." She told police her boyfriend of approximately 14 months was named "Lawrence Williams," and described him as a"47-year-old Black male; dark complexion; approximately 6'2, 170 pounds; with a one-inch Afro and missing a front tooth" and that he used a bicycle to get around. Police could not find a "Lawrence Williams" registered at the address provided by the victim.1
At the end of January, the victim was transferred from UCSF to a transitional residential facility. She had "an exacerbation of her chronic obstructive pulmonary disease," pneumonia, and "multiple rib fractures." A month later, she met with her "primary clinician" after she had left the facility "for a few days." The victim stated she had "reconnected with her boyfriend Lee Bell . . . although she had a restraining order against him," and that he "had beaten her and forced her to have oral, vaginal, and rectal sex with him; kept her trapped in the room; tore her fentanyl pain patch off"; and"destroyed her albuterol metered-dose inhaler." The victim had "bruising around her left eye and cheek."
By May, the victim was staying at a residential hospice facility. Early in the month, she returned to the facility with a "swollen lip" and a "laceration across her fingers of her right hand." She told staff defendant had caused the injuries when he had "come at her with a knife."
On May 16, she informed a nurse she was going to see defendant to get some money he owed her. The nurse told her, " " The victim replied, " " The nurse told her, " "
Two days later, on the morning of May 18, the victim's body was found in a "fetal position" inside a suitcase retrieved from the San Francisco Bay.2
A little over a year later, in June 2011, defendant was indicted by grand jury. Trial finally commenced in January 2017. During the interim six-year period, there were motions to dismiss the indictment, several psychological assessments, motions to continue and discovery requests, and multiple requests for substitute counsel.
Defendant's social worker Isaiah Hurtado testified he first met defendant in 2008 and had "pretty frequent" contact with him until 2010. During that time, Hurtado met the victim, who defendant introduced "as his girlfriend."
In March 2010, defendant called Hurtado asking if he "could assist him in locating [the victim] at the medical center that she was staying at." Defendant "called about seven times, each time increasingly more paranoid, saying [the victim] was after him and bothering him, and that sort of nature." In the last phone call, defendant said " 'I'm going to put a stop to this bitch once and for all.' " Hurtado reminded defendant he was a "mandated reporter" and, as such, he "was going to have to call the police." Defendant told Hurtado, " " Hurtado called police and filed a Tarasoff report,3 and then called "medical respite . . . [to] let them know that an attempt—or a threat on somebody's life was being made."
The office manager of the victim's hospice facility testified that in March 2010 defendant's name was placed on the "do-not-let-in list" at the facility. Defendant began calling the victim, at first "maybe two or three times a day," and then "it just kept escalating and escalating as the days went on." The calls and voicemails "became more aggressive." The "last week before she disappeared" defendant called "repeatedly." Sometimes the manager would answer and defendant would "hang up the phone; and then call back again," and other times defendant would attempt to "change his voice." The calls continued to escalate until the manager took the weekend of May 14 off. When he returned to work on Monday, May 17, he was told the victim left the facility the day before, but had not returned.The manager retrieved his voicemails from the weekend, and "most of them were from Mr. Bell looking for [the victim]." Defendant's calls ceased, however, after the weekend, and the manager received no calls that Monday or any day thereafter.
In May 2010, defendant was residing at the Harcourt Hotel, a single room occupancy hotel in San Francisco. The hotel manager testified defendant's behavior toward the victim "changed from day to day . . . one day he would introduce her to me and tell me he loved her; she was the greatest woman he ever met; she saved his life," and then the next day "he'd tell me she was the devil; he didn't want her in his room; to stay away from her; she was evil." The manager last saw defendant on Tuesday, May 18. Defendant's "demeanor most of the time was kind of anxious and nervous," but that morning "[h]e seemed even more so."
Defendant had been asked to leave the hotel by May 18. The desk clerk testified that at around 5:00 p.m. on Sunday May 16, the victim arrived at the hotel to see defendant. After the clerk informed defendant of her arrival, defendant came down to meet her in the lobby, and the two left together. They returned two hours later. Defendant was "shouting" in an "[a]ngry voice" at the victim who appeared "scared." The clerk last saw defendant and the victim together at the elevators of the hotel.
Prior to residing at the Harcourt Hotel, defendant had lived at the Drake Hotel, another single room occupancy hotel in San Francisco. Although he had moved out of the Drake, he kept some of his belongings there. The property manager at the Drake testified that on Monday, May 17, defendant...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting