People v. Coleman, s. 22376

Citation46 Cal.3d 749,251 Cal.Rptr. 83,759 P.2d 1260
Decision Date08 September 1988
Docket NumberNos. 22376,S004410,s. 22376
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court (California)
Parties, 759 P.2d 1260 The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Russell COLEMAN, Defendant and Appellant. Crim.
[759 P.2d 1263] Alvin J. Knudson, under appointment by the Supreme Court, Napa, for defendant and appellant

John K. Van de Kamp, Atty. Gen., Steve White, Chief Asst. Atty. Gen., John H. Sugiyama, Asst. Atty. Gen., Ann K. Jensen, Gloria F. DeHart and Mary A. Roth, Deputy Attys. Gen., for plaintiff and respondent.

LUCAS, Chief Justice.

This case arises under the 1978 death penalty initiative, codified as Penal Code sections 190 through 190.5 (further statutory references, unless otherwise indicated, are to this code). Defendant was convicted of first degree murder, rape, and sodomy, accompanied by two special circumstance findings, namely, murder committed while engaged in the commission of rape or the attempted commission of rape ( § 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(iii)), and murder committed while engaged in sodomy or attempted commission of sodomy (id., subd. (a)(17)(iv)). He was also found to have used a deadly weapon. The jury fixed the punishment at death. The appeal from the death penalty is automatic ( § 1239, subd. (b)).

We conclude that the judgment should be affirmed in its entirety.

I FACTS
A. Guilt Phase Evidence

Shirley Hill left her home in San Francisco on September 5, 1979, to attend a real estate course in neighboring Daly City. She was driven to school by her former husband, with whom she lived although they were divorced. They discussed how Hill would get home by bus, and the bus route. Hill was seen in classes from noon to 3 or 3:15 p.m., and was last seen at 3:30 at the Westlake Shopping Center in Daly City.

Hill's body was found the afternoon of September 6, 1979, in a bungalow adjoining the Mission High School football field. The field was several miles from the Westlake Shopping Center, but only a few blocks from a bus transfer stop which Hill would have used on her way home from Daly City. The floor of the bungalow was dusty everywhere except around the body, and the desk chairs in the bungalow were in disarray. Hill's personal belongings, including her underpants, a real estate binder and a coin purse containing some money, were scattered around her. She had died of ligature strangulation, and her slacks were knotted tightly around her neck.

The medical examination revealed numerous abrasions recently inflicted and consistent with the victim thrashing about. Death had occurred between 5 p.m. and 9 p.m. on September 5. Tests found sperm four to five inches inside the anal cavity and a similar amount of sperm five inches inside the vagina. No sperm was found on the pubic hair, perineum or thighs, and there were no semen stains on the victim's underpants, as would be likely if she had dressed after intercourse. The cavity tests and the lack of leakage or staining on the body's surfaces led the examining doctor in the coroner's office to conclude that two separate ejaculations had occurred, each shortly before death.

Other evidence recovered in the bungalow included a palm print found on a window sill and a thumbprint and smudged fingerprints found on the back of a chair. Hill's fingerprints were found on the window sill near the palm print and on either side of it. The position of her fingerprints indicated that when they were made Hill was on the floor probably facing the window. The position of the palm print also indicated that the other person was facing the window. The thumbprint and smudged fingerprints on the chair were visible as brown stains, as though the fingers had been sticky with some substance. It was impossible to date the fingerprints, thumbprint and palm print, which could have been placed at different times.

In January 1980, police officers matched defendant Russell Coleman's thumbprint to the one found on the chair in the bungalow. The palm print from the window sill also matched defendant's. The fingerprints on the chair could not be identified, because they were smudged.

After police made the print identification, they questioned defendant who had been arrested on unrelated charges. After being given Miranda admonitions (Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694), defendant agreed to talk to a police officer. Defendant said he did not know Shirley Hill. He also stated Defendant presented an alibi defense. He testified that on September 5, 1979, he was in class at City College of San Francisco until 3:30 p.m., had left school in the company of a friend, Carlton McAllister, and had gone home. Defendant's wife and children were home when he arrived. Defendant, his wife and McAllister visited until McAllister left at approximately 5 or 6 p.m. Defendant stayed home all night and did not leave until the next day. He had a clear memory of September 5, because it was the first day of classes at City College. Contrary to his statement to the officers, defendant explained the presence of his thumb and palm prints by stating that he had been in the bungalow on Labor Day, September 4, 1979. He had jogged on the football field, as was his habit, and had ducked into the bungalow for awhile to smoke a "joint." He claimed he had lied in the initial interview with the police because he was "scared, paranoid, and nervous." Testimony also revealed that defendant felt his memory for detail of the period was impaired because, after his arrest in January 1980, he had suffered a mental breakdown, was confined in San Francisco General Hospital, and given Haldol, a powerful drug which adversely affected his mental state.

that he knew where Mission High School was, but had never been on the football field there or in the bungalows adjacent to the field. He denied that the thumbprint found in the bungalow was his. When told that he was thought to be responsible for Shirley Hill's death, and would be booked, he terminated the interview.

McAllister, a pastor and bible college student, was also taking courses at City College in September 1979. McAllister testified that on September 5, he had attended a math course taught by Mr. Lindsey, and about 2 or 3 p.m., had encountered defendant in Cloud Hall. The men went by bus to defendant's house, a trip which took between 30 minutes and one hour. McAllister stated that he had stayed for a couple of hours, and that defendant was there the whole time and was still there when McAllister left. On cross-examination, McAllister stated that to the best of his recollection, he had met defendant on September 5, but it could have been during the first week of classes.

Defendant's former wife began her testimony by stating that she was divorced from him, did not have good feelings about him, and did not want to see him again. Nevertheless, she corroborated defendant's and McAllister's testimony as to their whereabouts the afternoon and evening of September 5. She also said that defendant stayed in the house all that evening and did not leave until 7 a.m. on September 6. She had not told the police or the district attorney's investigator of the alibi earlier, even though it might have absolved her husband, because she did not think it "her place to volunteer information."

The dean of admissions and records at City College brought copies of defendant's and McAllister's class schedules for fall 1979. On September 5, both McAllister and defendant were registered for a class taught by Lindsey, in Batmale Hall. McAllister and defendant both transferred to a different class, taught in Cloud Hall, on September 10 and 11, respectively. Lindsey produced his class attendance records for September 1979, which showed that defendant had been absent from class on September 5, 6 and 7. The absence on September 5 was marked excused, but not the others. Lindsey did not know when he had marked the September 5 absence excused, and conceded that it was possible that defendant came to him with an excuse after class on September 5. McAllister was marked present in Lindsey's class on the 5th. Defendant retook the stand after Lindsey's testimony, and explained that he had skipped class because of a class conflict. He remembered seeing Lindsey on the 5th and telling him he was going to drop the class. Defendant could not remember the conflicting class.

B. The Medical Experts' Testimony

Dr. Edward Blake, a forensic serologist, conducted tests on semen found in Hill's vagina, as well as on her blood. Prior to any testimony by Dr. Blake before the jury, defense counsel requested a foundational At the Evidence Code section 402 hearing, the prosecutor did not question Dr. Blake or otherwise attempt to lay a foundation for his testimony. Dr. Blake's testimony at the hearing was largely repeated at trial, and the following summary of Dr. Blake's testimony includes that given at the hearing and before the jury.

hearing pursuant to Evidence Code section 402. The record does not show the request or whether any objection or offer was made in connection with the request. 1 After the section 402 hearing, the only [759 P.2d 1266] objection defendant made to Dr. Blake's testimony was that he should have performed a test in addition to those tests that were performed.

Blake has a doctorate in criminology from the University of California at Berkeley. He wrote his doctoral dissertation on the determination of genetic markers in human semen. He has also published numerous articles on the subject.

Blake received a vaginal wash of Shirley Hill from Dr. Stephens of the coroner's office. Blake testified that a vaginal wash is generally obtained by inserting a saline solution into the cavity and then withdrawing it into a syringe. 2 He also obtained a sample of Hill's blood, and blood and saliva samples from her former husband and from defendant. Tests performed showed that the semen found...

To continue reading

Request your trial
148 cases
  • People v. Sivongxxay
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • June 19, 2017
    ...to visit with his wife," Attorney General conceded erroneous admission but argued it was harmless]; People v. Coleman (1988) 46 Cal.3d 749, 787-788, 251 Cal.Rptr. 83, 759 P.2d 1260 [though it was "not clear" that defendant's threat to correctional officer constituted criminal activity, defe......
  • People v. Rhoades
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • November 25, 2019
    ...to have him or her excused for cause is expected to use a peremptory challenge to remove the juror. (See People v. Coleman (1988) 46 Cal.3d 749, 767–770, 251 Cal.Rptr. 83, 759 P.2d 1260.) It is entirely plausible that the prosecutors believed they were unlikely to succeed with for-cause cha......
  • People v. Gordon
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • June 21, 1990
    ...under harmless-error analysis. Certainly, this is true of an erroneous ruling denying such a challenge. (People v. Coleman (1988) 46 Cal.3d 749, 768-771, 251 Cal.Rptr. 83, 759 P.2d 1260; see People v. Bittaker (1989) 48 Cal.3d 1046, 1088, 259 Cal.Rptr. 630, 774 P.2d 659 [following Coleman].......
  • People v. Ashmus
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • December 5, 1991
    ...state constitutional right to an impartial jury was violated by an excusal for cause. Thereafter, in People v. Coleman (1988) 46 Cal.3d 749, 765, 251 Cal.Rptr. 83, 759 P.2d 1260, we construed Witt in accordance with its plain terms, and beyond the factual context of Witherspoon, to state a ......
  • 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