People v. Brown

Decision Date11 August 2003
Docket NumberNo. S026700.,S026700.
Citation3 Cal.Rptr.3d 145,73 P.3d 1137,31 Cal.4th 518
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
PartiesThe PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Andrew Lamont BROWN, Defendant and Appellant.

Ronald S. Smith, Los Angeles, under appointment by the Supreme Court, for Defendant and Appellant.

Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, David P. Druliner, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gary W. Schons, Assistant Attorney General, Esteban Hernandez, William M. Wood, Leslie B. Fleming and David Delgado-Rucci, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

WERDEGAR, J.

Andrew Lamont Brown was convicted in 1992 in Riverside County Superior Court of the robbery and first degree murder of Christina Ann Barraza Ramirez. (Pen. Code, §§ 187, 211; all further statutory references are to this code unless otherwise indicated.) The jury also sustained a special circumstance allegation that defendant committed the murder while engaged in the commission of a robbery (§ 190.2, former subd. (a)(17)(i), now redesignated subd. (a)(17)(A)) and two enhancement allegations that he personally used a firearm in the commission of his crimes (§ 12022.5, subd. (a)). On March 5, 1992, the jury set the penalty at death under the 1978 death penalty law. (§ 190.1 et seq.) This appeal is automatic. (§ 1239, subd. (b).)

After considering the claims raised on appeal, we affirm the judgment in its entirety.

I. FACTS
A. Guilt Phase

Levi Gardner bought a Mitsubishi Mighty Max pickup truck on November 1, 1988. Defendant asked him if he would like to buy some deep-dish tire rims for his truck. Gardner replied that he would have to see them before committing to buying some. Defendant said he could obtain some. P.M. (a 15-year-old minor) overheard the conversation and confirmed it.

In November 1988, defendant was living "off and on" in a home near Perris, California, with Mark Bender, Broderick Fields, P.M., Andrew White and others. Defendant told White he "was going to do a jack move to get some rims" (by which he meant he was going to "rob somebody at gunpoint for their car") and asked White to join him. White declined. On November 11, 1988, defendant, Fields, Mark Bender and P.M. left in Bender's Oldsmobile Cutlass and drove around, looking for some deep-dish rims to steal.

Joe Ramirez was married to victim Christina Ramirez. In November 1988, he owned a red 1985 Nissan minitruck with a red camper shell. It had been lowered ("like a low rider truck") and had a Kenwood brand stereo and amplifier inside. It also had distinctive deep-dish tire rims, each bearing small decorative holes and custom painted red to match the truck. The rims were locked on the axels except for the front left rim. On November 11th, a little before 9:00 p.m., Christina left her home to take her cousins, who had been visiting, to her sister's apartment. She took her sister's car but soon returned, complaining the brakes were not working well. Her husband told her to take his truck instead. She planned to stop at Dairy Queen for a snack on the way back but had no money, so Joe gave her a $50 bill because it was the smallest bill he had. She then left in the truck.

Christina went to her parents' home in Riverside but left with her sister around 9:00. She had a quick meal with her sister at a restaurant and then drove alone in the red truck towards the Dairy Queen in Riverside. The car containing defendant, Fields, Bender and P.M. was traveling in the opposite direction when defendant saw the rims on Christina's truck and exclaimed, "Those are the ones we need." They made a U-turn and followed the victim for two traffic lights. Christina eventually stopped for a red light, and Bender stopped directly behind her. According to P.M.'s testimony, defendant jumped out carrying a .38-caliber pistol, ran to the driver's side of the red truck, and fired one shot through the window, shattering it. He then pulled Christina out and got into the truck from the driver's side. Fields also jumped from Bender's car at this time, ran to the passenger side of the truck and got in. Both the Cutlass, now with just Mark Bender and P.M. inside, and the red Nissan truck, driven by defendant with Fields as a passenger, then left the scene. They met later at Perry Bender's house.

Juan Williams was in a brown Mercedes Benz, stopped at the red light directly behind Mark Bender's Cutlass. He saw only one man run up to the driver's side of the red truck. He described the assailant as a young Hispanic male, between five feet three inches and five feet six inches tall. The assailant threw the victim from the truck and then drove off in it. Williams testified he did not see a second man enter the truck on the passenger side, although a police officer testified later in the trial that Williams told him the night of the murder that he had seen two men run up to the truck.

Rena Stanfill was in a Ford Bronco behind Williams's Mercedes. She was about 30 to 35 feet from the crime. She described the car in front of the Mercedes as a medium-sized American car. In front of that car was a red or maroon pickup truck. She saw two men alight from the American car and run to the red pickup truck. One man, an African-American about five feet 10 inches tall,1 ran to the driver's side and pulled a woman from the truck; the victim struck the pavement face first. The second man, who was either Hispanic or African-American, jumped into the passenger side of the truck. The two men then left the scene in the truck, followed by the American car. Stanfill, who was driving with her windows rolled up and the radio turned on, did not hear a gunshot.

Christina Ramirez suffered a single gunshot wound to the neck. The bullet entered the left side of her neck and traveled downward, injuring and lodging in her spine. She did not die immediately, but expired on December 21, 1988; the gunshot wound was the cause of death. The bullet recovered from her body was consistent with having been fired from a .38-caliber handgun.

Around 11:45 that night, Mark Bender, with Fields and P.M., arrived in the Cutlass at Perry Bender's home. (Perry is Mark Bender's brother.) Mark was visibly upset; inside Perry's home, he blurted out: "I know he shot her. I know she is hurt bad." He was referring to defendant. Around midnight, defendant arrived in the Ramirezes' red truck, playing loud music on the stereo. He had a .38-caliber handgun. When Perry asked him how he obtained the truck, he said he got it in Riverside and that he "[s]moked the bitch." Perry saw defendant rifling through a woman's purse; defendant found $50 in it.

Sometime between 11:00 p.m. and 1:00 a.m., Timothy Gardner, Levi's brother, saw defendant in front of Harb's Liquor Store/Market.2 He was sitting in a red minitruck with a camper shell and deepdish rims; the stereo was playing loudly. Defendant asked him where Levi Gardner was. He asked Timothy Gardner to tell his brother that he had some "deeps" for him.

Defendant apparently parked the truck in a secluded place in the hills of Mead Valley. On November 12th, he offered to sell a single deep-dish tire rim to Levi Gardner for $50. It was painted red and had circular holes in it. Gardner wanted to see all four rims before committing to the purchase, so they got in Gardner's truck and defendant directed him to a remote location in the hills. Down a dirt road, they came upon a red pickup truck with a camper shell. It had deep-dish rims, but was missing one from the front. Gardner had a "bad feeling" about the deal and declined to buy them. Defendant offered to lower the price if Gardner helped him remove the other three rims, but he declined.

Kevin Davis also saw the red truck in the Mead Valley hills sometime in November 1988. Defendant offered to sell him a Kenwood brand car stereo, amplifier and speakers, but he declined. He once saw defendant in the parking lot of a liquor store with a rim matching those on the victim's truck. He had also seen defendant with a .38-caliber handgun. Tony Dilleworth also testified that defendant tried to sell him a Kenwood brand car stereo, amplifier and speakers in November 1988.

Acting on a tip, the Riverside Sheriffs Department located and towed the victim's truck from the hills. It was missing one wheel and all of its stereo components. Heavy scratch marks around the lug nuts suggested someone had used the wrong tool to try and remove the remaining wheels. Police found a small amount of blood in the doorjamb on the driver's side. Defendant apparently blamed Rick Kinney, an acquaintance, for the truck's disappearance from the hills. He later confronted Kinney, saying: "Where's my truck at? I took that truck that you're riding around today, that red truck in the hills, that was mine." Manny Kelly, who was with Kinney at the time, overheard this conversation.

The day after the crime, a crowd of people, including defendant and Andrew White, were gathered in the early evening in front of a liquor store. According to White, defendant described for the group how he acquired the red pickup truck, saying he "smoked the bitch." When people in the group expressed skepticism at this account, defendant swore it was true and invoked his gang, Fruit Town, as proof it was true. Defendant asked White to help him remove the rims from the truck and, although White had experience in such things because he had been a car thief, he declined because he had heard that defendant had shot a person in order to obtain the truck.

B. Penalty Phase

The prosecution's case in aggravation consisted of evidence of eight different violent crimes defendant had committed, as well as victim impact evidence.

On January 12, 1988, Flecia Bennett lived with defendant and their two children. She wanted to buy some cigarettes at the store. Defendant did not want her to go and socked her in the mouth, drawing blood. In response, Bennett hit him in the head with a chair. Defendant produced a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1347 cases
  • Dominguez v. Trimble
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of California
    • May 21, 2012
    ...13 Cal.4th at p. 1070 [defendant's evidence of self-defense is subject to all normal evidentiary rules, including § 352]; People v. Brown (2003) 31 Cal.4th 518, 534 [trial court has discretion to admit or exclude evidence offered for impeachment] ). Section 352 provides: "The court in its d......
  • People v. Landry, S100735
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (California)
    • December 12, 2016
    ...does not contend, nor could he, that CALJIC 2.11.5 was either inapplicable to this case or flawed as given. (See People v. Brown (2003) 31 Cal.4th 518, 560, 3 Cal.Rptr.3d 145, 73 P.3d 1137 [purpose of the instruction " ‘is to discourage the jury from irrelevant speculation about the prosecu......
  • People v. Gallardo, B269034
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • December 6, 2017
    ...occur when the accomplice has been arrested or is questioned by the police." ’ [Citation.]" ( People v. Brown (2003) 31 Cal.4th 518, 555, 3 Cal.Rptr.3d 145, 73 P.3d 1137.) The trial court was correct, however, that section 1111's corroboration requirement is inapplicable to an out-of-court ......
  • People v. Brooks
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (California)
    • March 20, 2017
    ...instruction. (People v. Streeter, supra , 54 Cal.4th at pp. 265–266, 142 Cal.Rptr.3d 481, 278 P.3d 754 ; People v. Brown (2003) 31 Cal.4th 518, 567, 3 Cal.Rptr.3d 145, 73 P.3d 1137.) This court has observed that the standard instruction (CALJIC No. 8.85 ) describing the factors the jury sho......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
11 books & journal articles
  • Table of cases
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books California Objections
    • March 29, 2023
    ...3d 614, 176 Cal. Rptr. 143, §9:100 Brown, People v. (2004) 33 Cal. 4th 892, 16 Cal. Rptr. 3d 447, §§17:60, 21:70 Brown, People v. (2003) 31 Cal. 4th 518, 3 Cal. Rptr. 3d 145, §§1:70, 1:320, 9:130 Brown, People v. (1994) 8 Cal. 4th 746, 35 Cal. Rptr. 2d 407, §9:30 Brown, People v. (1993) 6 C......
  • Hearsay
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books California Objections
    • March 29, 2023
    ...the robbery, and both levels of hearsay qualified under the spontaneous statement exception to the hearsay rule. People v. Brown (2003) 31 Cal. 4th 518, 541, 3 Cal. Rptr. 3d 145. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting a statement made two and one-half hours after the crim......
  • Objections, motions and related procedures
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books California Objections
    • March 29, 2023
    ...Co. (1978) 76 Cal. App. 3d 548, 553, 143 Cal. Rptr. 269. • Withdrew the objection to the challenged instruction. People v. Brown (2003) 31 Cal. 4th 518, 560, 3 Cal. Rptr. 3d 145. • Requested the modification of an instruction and suggested the language challenged on appeal. People v. Riazat......
  • Table of cases
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books California Drunk Driving Law - Volume 1-2 Appendices
    • March 30, 2022
    ...§9:33.1 People v. Brown (1989) 216 Cal.App.3d 596, §2:84.1 People v. Brown (1993) 6 Cal.4th 322, §§4:16.1, 8:13.6 People v. Brown (2003) 31 Cal.4th 518, §9:99.1 People v. Brown (2007) 147 Cal App. 4th 1213, 1225, §14:22 People v. Brown (2010) 182 Cal.App.4th 1354, §10:35.3 People v. Brown (......
  • 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