People v. Gonzales
| Court | California Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | WERDEGAR, J. |
| Citation | People v. Gonzales, 52 Cal.4th 254, 256 P.3d 543, 128 Cal.Rptr.3d 417 (Cal. 2011) |
| Decision Date | 28 July 2011 |
| Docket Number | No. S075616.,S075616. |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent,v.John Anthony GONZALES and Michael Soliz, Defendants and Appellants. |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE Michael J. Hersek, State Public Defender, under appointment by the Supreme Court, Jay Colangelo and Jessica K. McGuire, Assistant State Public Defenders, for Defendant and Appellant Michael Soliz.Joseph F. Walsh, Los Angeles, under appointment by the Supreme Court, for Defendant and Appellant John Anthony Gonzales.Bill Lockyer, Edmund G. Brown, Jr., and Kamala D. Harris, Attorneys General, Robert R. Anderson and Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela D. Hamanaka, Assistant Attorney General, John R. Gorey, Sharlene A. Honnaka and Steven D. Matthews, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.WERDEGAR, J.
[52 Cal.4th 263 , 256 P.3d 555]
A Los Angeles County jury found defendants John Anthony Gonzales and Michael Soliz guilty of the first degree murder of Lester Eaton (count 1), Elijah Skyles (count 4) and Gary Price (count 5). (peN.code, §§ 187, 189.) 1 the jury found true the special circumstance allegations of multiple murder and murder during the commission of robbery.( § 190.2, subd. (a)(3) & (17)(A).) 2 at the penalty phase, the jury returned a verdict of life without the possibility of parole for Gonzales on counts 4 and 5 and hung on all other penalty phase verdicts. At the penalty phase retrial, a new jury returned a verdict of death for Gonzales on count 1, a verdict of life without the possibility of parole for Soliz on count 1, and a verdict of death for Soliz on counts 4 and 5. The trial court denied defendants' motions for a new trial ( § 1181) and for modification of the penalty ( § 190.4, subd. (e)), and sentenced them to death. This appeal is automatic. ( Cal. Const., art. VI, § 11; Pen.Code, § 1239, subd. (b).)
We affirm the judgments.
Defendants were members of the Puente gang, a Hispanic street gang in the City of La Puente. They were charged with two separate sets of murders. In the first, Lester Eaton was killed while defendants robbed the small neighborhood store he owned, the Hillgrove Market. Gonzales's fingerprints were found on items in the getaway vehicle. The testimony of witnesses to defendants' actions before and after the robbery-murder linked both defendants to the crime. Additionally, in separate, taped conversations, each defendant admitted having participated in the robbery, and Gonzales admitted he was the shooter. The victims of the second set of murders were Elijah Skyles and Gary Price, African–American teenagers who were shot numerous times at a gas station. The prosecution theorized defendants killed Skyles and Price in retaliation for the murder of a member of the Puente gang two weeks earlier by members of the Neighborhood Crips gang. Several eyewitnesses identified Soliz as the shooter, with Gonzales providing backup. In a tape-recorded conversation, however, Gonzales said he had been the sole shooter and sole participant in the Skyles and Price murders. At the penalty phase, the jury returned a verdict of life without the possibility of parole for Gonzales for the Skyles and Price murders, but could not reach a verdict as to Gonzales for the Eaton murder or as to Soliz for either set of murders. At the penalty retrial, Gonzales took the stand for the first time in the proceedings, admitted he had shot Eaton during the Hillgrove Market robbery, and reiterated that he had been the shooter and sole participant in the Skyles and Price murders (as he stated in the taped conversation). The jury returned a verdict of death for Gonzales for the Eaton murder, a verdict of death for Soliz for the Skyles and Price murders, and a verdict of life without the possibility of parole for Soliz for the Eaton murder.
(1) Robbery and Murder at the Hillgrove Market
Lester and Betty Eaton, married for 43 years, owned and operated the Hillgrove Market on Clark Avenue in Hacienda Heights, an unincorporated part of Los Angeles County near the City of La Puente. As Betty Eaton testified, she and Lester were alone in the market about 7:30 on the evening of January 27, 1996. Lester was talking on the phone in a back room (the meat-cutting room) near the sink and Betty was up front behind the meat counter. Two young men entered the market; the first pointed a gun at Betty and asked, “Where do you keep your money?” He appeared to be Hispanic and between 18 and 20 years old. He wore a close-fitting cap that covered his hair and a bandanna that covered his face from the nose down. The second man pointed a gun at Lester, who said, “Put that thing down before someone gets hurt.” The second man was also Hispanic, in his late teens or early 20's. He did not wear either a bandanna or a hair-covering. Betty saw the second man primarily from the back and testified that she would be unable to recognize either of the men if she ever saw them again.
The second man pinned Lester against the sink and struck him, causing blood to flow from his forehead. The next thing Betty saw was Lester lying on the floor in a fetal position behind the meat counter. She heard two gunshots and knew he had been shot. Betty panicked and ran out through the front door of the market. She saw a dark blue van parked in front. As she ran towards a neighbor's house, she heard the squealing of tires from a vehicle and thought the robbers were coming after her. She pounded on the neighbors' door until they opened it, ran in and dialed 911. She returned to the market as the first patrol car was pulling up. The blue van that she had seen parked in front was gone. When sheriff's deputies later drove her from the market to the sheriff's station, she saw what appeared to be the same blue van now parked at the corner of Clark Avenue and Turnbull Canyon Road.
(2) The Crime Scene Investigation and Autopsy
Responding to a patrol dispatch, sheriff's deputies found Lester Eaton lying on the floor behind the Hillgrove Market's meat counter in a large pool of blood, with a bullet wound to his back. Five minutes later, paramedics arrived, examined Lester and pronounced him dead. His left front trouser pocket had been pulled inside out, and he was wearing an empty holster on his belt. Despite a thorough search, no expended shell casings were found at the crime scene, which led one of the investigating officers to infer that the weapon used was a revolver, not an automatic or a semiautomatic weapon, which eject their casings when fired. Lester's shotgun and his revolver, a Colt, which he wore in the holster on his hip, had been taken from the store, as had his wallet. Personal items from his wallet were later discovered nearby scattered along the road. The market's cash register was on the floor, and the money tray was missing, along with the day's proceeds (about $100 in cash plus food stamps). Weeks later, while cleaning up the market, Betty found an expended bullet, which she gave to investigators.
The medical examiner found five gunshot wounds to Lester's body: two to the head and three to the chest (of which one was significant and two were superficial). The two wounds to the head and the significant chest wound were consistent with the victim's having sat on the floor with the shooter standing over and behind him. One of the head wounds and the significant chest wound were fatal; the other head wound was serious and possibly fatal. One wound to the head had been caused by a bullet fired at close range, from between half an inch and 18 inches away; the other was a near-contact wound shot from within half an inch. There was a laceration to the head caused by blunt force trauma, consistent with having been struck by the barrel of a gun.
(3) Contents of the Getaway Vehicle
Patrol officers found the getaway vehicle, a blue 1993 Chevrolet Astro van, parked two to three blocks away from the market on the corner of Turnbull Canyon Road and Clark Avenue. The van had been reported stolen, and the passenger-side window was broken out. Inside, investigators found a cash register tray and food stamp coupons. At trial, Betty Eaton identified the cash register tray found in the van as the one taken from the market. She also identified three receipts (bearing her handwriting and that of a customer) found in the van as being from her cash register. Other items found in the van included an unexpended bullet, a Raiders jacket and various pieces of paperwork unconnected to the market. Fingerprints on two of the pieces of paperwork were identified as those of defendant Gonzales.
(4) Dorine Ramos and Events Before the Robbery Murder
Earlier on the day of the murder, Dorine Ramos was running errands with her friend Rosemary. Rosemary's boyfriend, Randy Irigoyen, was driving the two in Rosemary's car. As former gang member Salvador Berber later testified at trial, Irigoyen and defendants Gonzales and Soliz were members of the Perth Street gang, which was a “clique” (subgroup) of the Puente criminal street gang. Irigoyen suggested to Ramos that she should get her own car and took her to look at two vehicles he said she could have “for cheap.” The second vehicle he showed her was a blue Astro van, which she later testified looked like the getaway vehicle later used for the Hillgrove Market robbery murder. Ramos told Irigoyen she was not interested in buying either vehicle, and he then drove them to a nearby house.
Ramos stayed in the car while Irigoyen joined a group of about 10 men gathered in front of the house. They ranged in age from 18 to 29 years old and all had similar, very short haircuts, which Ramos described as being “cholo” (gangster) style. Ramos saw defendants Gonzales and Soliz among the group. Defendants told Irigoyen that they needed a “cuete” ...
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
Start Your Free Trial
-
People v. Tousant
...and (4) any one of the charges carries the death penalty or joinder of them turns the matter into a capital case." ( People v. Gonzales and Soliz (2011) 52 Cal.4th 254, 282.) The potential prejudice from the joint trial is then balanced against the benefits to the state. ( People v. Soper (......
-
People v. Young
...P.3d 12 ; accord, People v. Peoples (2016) 62 Cal.4th 718, 751, 198 Cal.Rptr.3d 365, 365 P.3d 230 ; People v. Gonzales and Soliz (2011) 52 Cal.4th 254, 311, 128 Cal.Rptr.3d 417, 256 P.3d 543 ; see also People v. Trinh (2014) 59 Cal.4th 216, 237–238, 173 Cal.Rptr.3d 1, 326 P.3d 939 [reaching......
-
People v. Steskal
...371 P.3d 161 [multiple gunshots at close range supported theory of premeditation and deliberation]; People v. Gonzales and Soliz (2011) 52 Cal.4th 254, 295, 128 Cal.Rptr.3d 417, 256 P.3d 543 [same]).Steskal contends the patrol car also lacked probative value because it was cumulative of the......
-
People v. Rhoades
...376 P.3d 528 ; People v. Peoples (2016) 62 Cal.4th 718, 751, 198 Cal.Rptr.3d 365, 365 P.3d 230 ; People v. Gonzales and Soliz (2011) 52 Cal.4th 254, 311, 128 Cal.Rptr.3d 417, 256 P.3d 543.) In his reply brief, defendant acknowledges Taylor but urges us to reconsider that decision, arguing t......
-
Table of cases
...Gonzales, People v. (2012) 54 Cal. 4th 1234, 144 Cal. Rptr. 3d 757, §§7:10, 11:10, 16:100, 21:90, 21:120 Gonzales, People v. (2011) 52 Cal. 4th 254, 128 Cal. Rptr. 3d 417, §18:20 Gonzales, People v. (2011) 51 Cal. 4th 894, 126 Cal. Rptr. 3d 1, §§17:100, 20:40, 21:30 Gonzales, People v. (196......
-
Chapter 5 - §2. Elements for exclusion
...Miranda is not required unless the subject is aware of the agency relationship. See Perkins, 496 U.S. at 297; People v. Gonzales (2011) 52 Cal.4th 254, 284. Miranda warnings are not required when a suspect gives voluntary statements to a person, such as an undercover informant, who he does ......
-
Chapter 2 - §13. Judicial notice
...and average intelligence and knowledge. 7 Cal. Law Revision Comm'n Rep. (1965) pp. 1065-66; see, e.g., People v. Gonzales (2011) 52 Cal.4th 254, 322-23 (not universally known that semiautomatic weapon cannot be easily rendered fully automatic); Oakes v. Progressive Transportation Servs., In......
-
Alternative methods of proof
...Code §450. The court may not take judicial notice of a fact just because the court knows that fact to be true. People v. Gonzales (2011) 52 Cal. 4th 254, 322-323, 128 Cal. Rptr. 3d 417 (error to take judicial notice that a semiautomatic weapon cannot be rendered fully automatic by manipulat......