People v. Jones

Decision Date10 March 1997
Docket NumberNo. S009141,S009141
Citation15 Cal.4th 119,61 Cal.Rptr.2d 386,931 P.2d 960
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
Parties, 15 Cal.4th 431A, 931 P.2d 960, 97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1760, 97 Daily Journal D.A.R. 3301 The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Jeffrey Gerard JONES, Defendant and Appellant

Fern M. Laethem, State Public Defender, under appointment by the Supreme Court, Emry J. Allen, Ronald F. Turner and Jessica K. McGuire, Deputy State Public Defenders, Sacramento, for Defendant and Appellant.

Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General, George Williamson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Assistant Attorney General, Michael J. Weinberger, William George Prahl and Thomas Y. Shigemoto, Deputy Attorneys General, Sacramento, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

GEORGE, Chief Justice.

Defendant Jeffrey Gerard Jones was convicted, following a jury trial, of two counts of first degree murder (Pen.Code, §§ 187, 189) 1 and one count of attempted first degree murder (§§ 664/187). The jury found true the allegations that defendant personally had used a deadly or dangerous weapon (a hammer) in the commission of each offense (§ 12022, subd. (b)) and found, as special circumstances, that defendant had been convicted in this proceeding of multiple murders (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(3)). The jury further found that defendant, who had pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, was sane when he committed the charged offenses. Following the penalty phase of the trial, the jury set the penalty at death. This appeal from the resulting judgment of death is automatic. (§ 1239, subd. (b).) For the reasons that follow, we affirm the judgment in its entirety.

I Competency Hearings

On January 25, 1985, a felony complaint was filed charging defendant with the present offenses. On March 1, 1985, the municipal court suspended the criminal proceedings and transferred the case to the superior court under section 1368 for a determination of defendant's mental competence to stand trial. 2 The superior court appointed Dr. Bruce Kaldor and Dr. Captane Thomson to examine defendant.

The parties waived their right to a jury and, on September 6, 1985, a hearing to determine defendant's competence to stand trial commenced before Superior Court Judge Benjamin Diaz. Following a five-day hearing, Judge Diaz ruled that defendant was not competent to stand trial and, on October 1, 1985, ordered that he be committed to Atascadero State Hospital. After four months at that facility, officials there determined that defendant's competency had been restored and, on February 3, 1986, the superior court ordered that defendant be returned from the state hospital and that criminal proceedings be resumed.

On October 13, 1987, defense attorney Jessie Morris filed a declaration pursuant to section 1368 expressing doubt as to defendant's competency to stand trial. The superior court again suspended proceedings and reappointed Dr. Kaldor to examine defendant. A jury trial on the issue of defendant's competency commenced on March 1, 1988. As explained more fully below, defendant presented evidence indicating that he suffered from paranoid schizophrenia and was receiving heavy doses of medication to control the symptoms of that disease. Defendant contended that both the disease itself and the side effects of the medication rendered him incompetent to stand trial. The prosecution countered that defendant was malingering by exaggerating his symptoms of mental illness. The jury found that defendant was competent to stand trial, and the case proceeded to trial.

Guilt Phase

The trial began on July 18, 1988. The evidence introduced at the guilt phase of the trial showed the following:

Shortly after noon on January 21, 1985, Harry Dong was found lying on the floor of a restroom at Sutter's Fort in Sacramento. He was bleeding profusely from severe wounds to his head and face. Larry Button, an emergency medical technician who treated Dong at the scene, described the victim's face as "pretty well destroyed." The fly on the victim's pants was open, and the victim's penis was outside his shorts.

Button noticed defendant, who appeared to be a transient, standing outside the restroom and heard defendant tell another man that the victim's "face was bashed in." This comment attracted Button's attention because the victim's injury had been reported as a possible gunshot wound, and appeared to the technician to have been caused by a shotgun.

Dr. Hugh Moore, a physician specializing in otolaryngology (head and neck surgery), treated Dong at the emergency room of the Sacramento Medical Center of the University of California. Dong's injuries were caused not by a gunshot, but by many blows with a blunt instrument, such as a baseball bat, the curved end of a crowbar, or a hammer. Dong subsequently died as a result of his injuries.

At approximately 5 p.m. that same day, January 21, 1985, medical student John Rowland entered the men's restroom in the lobby of the Sacramento Medical Center and began to use one of the urinals. The next thing he knew, he was lying on the floor in a pool of blood, with his head spinning. He tried to call for help but was unable to yell very loudly. He crawled to the door, raised himself up, and grabbed the door handle. As the door opened, he fell backwards into the lobby.

Rowland was rushed to the emergency room. Dr. Moore, who was in the operating room treating Dong, was summoned to treat Rowland. Dr. Moore was struck by the fact that Dong and Rowland had sustained "very similar" injuries on the same day, although Dong's injuries were more severe than Rowland's. It appeared that Dong had received many more blows. The injuries to both victims could have been caused by a hammer.

While Rowland was being treated, a nurse noticed defendant standing in the hallway just outside the emergency room. Defendant stayed for five or ten minutes and then left.

Rowland survived and was operated upon by two teams of surgeons to repair a series of fractures extending from the rear of his head to the right side of his jaw. He was rendered deaf in one ear, and one side of his face is paralyzed and numb, his balance is impaired, and he has continuing dental problems.

Shortly after 5 p.m. on the following day, January 22, 1985, Ronald English, an intern at the Sacramento Medical Center, was passing near the men's restroom in the emergency room when he heard a scream and saw people pointing toward the door of the restroom. English approached, and saw defendant leaving the restroom. English put his hand on defendant's shoulder and asked him whether he was all right. Defendant responded: "That guy in there is crazy." As English and defendant were talking, Parmand Sharma, a custodian at the medical center, entered the restroom and yelled for help, saying someone had been injured. Defendant brushed English's hand off of his shoulder and "took off running." English chased defendant and called for help, while Sharma summoned the campus police. With the help of a bystander, English tackled defendant and held him until campus police officer William Davisson arrived.

As Officer Davisson handcuffed defendant, he noticed a wooden handle protruding from the waistband at the rear of defendant's pants, and then removed a claw hammer from defendant's pants. Officer Davisson learned via his walkie-talkie that an assault had occurred, and responded that he had a suspect in custody. Defendant, who apparently had overheard this conversation, stated: "I have been framed." When subsequently booked, defendant was able to follow simple instructions without apparent difficulty.

While defendant was being pursued, emergency room nurse Jeffrey Howell entered the restroom and found Dr. Michael Corbett slumped in front of the urinal, bleeding profusely from the back of his head. Corbett's breathing was slow and irregular, and he was nonresponsive and near death. Despite efforts to resuscitate him, Corbett died as a result of his injuries.

Autopsies revealed that Dong and Corbett died as the result of having received multiple blows from a blunt instrument. Their injuries were quite similar, and both victims displayed circular bruises, approximately one inch in diameter. The hammer found in defendant's possession could have caused Dong's and Corbett's injuries. There were no defensive wounds to indicate that either Dong or Corbett attempted to fend off his attacker.

Dr. Bahram Cherazi, a neurosurgeon who operated on both Corbett and Rowland, testified that the injuries suffered by both victims were quite similar and "appeared to be imparted by a rounded, pointed but not necessarily a sharp object ... with a great deal of force." Both Corbett's and Rowland's injuries could have been inflicted by using the hammer seized from defendant.

Evidence of the following uncharged similar offense was admitted for the limited purpose of proving that defendant was the individual who committed the charged offenses. Shortly after noon on January 18, 1985, three days before Dong was killed, Jere Lipps, a professor of geology at the University of California at Davis, heard someone turn the doorknob of the locked door to his office, and then knock on the door. Professor Lipps opened the door, found defendant standing there, and asked defendant what he wanted. Defendant said he was looking for a friend. When defendant mentioned a room number, Professor Lipps gave him directions to that room. As they spoke, defendant looked over Professor Lipps's shoulder into the office. Professor Lipps returned to his office and closed the door but, because defendant had acted suspiciously during their encounter, Professor Lipps soon returned to the hallway to see where defendant had gone and was startled to find him still standing near the door. After Professor Lipps repeated the directions he had given earlier, defendant started down the hallway, walking stiffly, with his...

To continue reading

Request your trial
183 cases
  • People v. Baker
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • February 1, 2021
    ...issue, and the best evidence often will be the demeanor of the attorney who exercises the challenge.’ " ( People v. Jones (1997) 15 Cal.4th 119, 162, 61 Cal.Rptr.2d 386, 931 P.2d 960.) "A trial court is best situated to evaluate both the words and the demeanor of jurors who are peremptorily......
  • People v. Duong
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • August 10, 2020
    ...determining the appropriate punishment in a capital case is a difficult decision that requires courage." ( People v. Jones (1997) 15 Cal.4th 119, 185, 61 Cal.Rptr.2d 386, 931 P.2d 960, overruled on another ground in People v. Hill (1998) 17 Cal.4th 800, 823, fn. 1, 72 Cal.Rptr.2d 656, 952 P......
  • People v. Ghobrial, S105908
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • June 21, 2018
    ...for a prosecutor to invoke examples to illustrate a general point about the operation of the law. ( People v. Jones (1997) 15 Cal.4th 119, 180, 61 Cal.Rptr.2d 386, 931 P.2d 960, overruled on another ground in People v. Hill (1998) 17 Cal.4th 800, 832, fn. 1, 72 Cal.Rptr.2d 656, 952 P.2d 673......
  • People v. Kipp
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • June 22, 1998
    ...inexorably be carried out. (People v. Holt, supra, 15 Cal.4th 619, 688, 63 Cal.Rptr.2d 782, 937 P.2d 213; People v. Jones (1997) 15 Cal.4th 119, 189, 61 Cal.Rptr.2d 386, 931 P.2d 960; People v. Hawthorne, supra, 4 Cal.4th 43, 76, 14 Cal.Rptr.2d 133, 841 P.2d 118.) Although it is not imprope......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Table of cases
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books California Drunk Driving Law - Volume 1-2 Appendices
    • March 30, 2022
    ...People v. Jones (1991) 228 Cal.App.3d 519, §7:11.2 People v. Jones (1995) 37 Cal.App.4th 1312, §§4:15.1, 9:104.2 People v. Jones (1997) 15 Cal.4th 119, 171, fn. 17, §12:37 People v. Jones (2000) 82 Cal.App.4th 663, §2:84.1 - PE - F-35 Table of Cases People v. Jones (2003) 29 Cal.4th 1229, 1......
  • Criminal appeals and civil writs
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books California Drunk Driving Law - Volume 1-2 Volume 2
    • March 30, 2022
    ...been improper for the court to take judicial notice of the police report and, a fortiori, its attachments. (See People v. Jones (1997) 15 Cal.4th 119, 171, fn. 17, overruled on unrelated grounds in People v. Hill (1998) 17 Cal.4th 800, 823 fn. 1.) Accordingly, we strike the quoted sentence ......

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