People v. Kipp

Decision Date22 June 1998
Docket NumberNo. S004784,S004784
Citation956 P.2d 1169,18 Cal.4th 349,75 Cal.Rptr.2d 716
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
Parties, 956 P.2d 1169, 98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4781, 98 Daily Journal D.A.R. 6783 The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Martin James KIPP, Defendant and Appellant

Ross Thomas, San Francisco, and John Ward, Berkeley, under appointments by the Supreme Court, for Defendant and Appellant.

Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General, George Williamson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gary W. Schons, Assistant Attorney General, Garrett Beaumont, David I. Friedenberg, Carl H. Horst and Gary W. Brozio, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

KENNARD, Justice.

This appeal by defendant Martin James Kipp from a judgment of death comes to this court automatically. (Pen.Code, § 1239, subd. (b); all further statutory references are to this code unless otherwise indicated.) A jury convicted defendant of one count of first degree murder (§ 187) with the special circumstance that the murder was committed during an attempted rape (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(iii)). The same jury also convicted defendant of one count of attempted rape by force (§§ 261, subd. (a)(2), 664), and it returned a penalty verdict of death for the first degree murder with a special circumstance. The trial court denied the automatic motion to modify penalty (§ 190.4, subd. (e)), and it pronounced a sentence of death for the murder and a sentence of three years in state prison for the attempted rape. We shall affirm the judgment.

I. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS

Antaya Howard, age 19, was found dead in her automobile. She had been beaten and strangled and the condition of her corpse and her clothing suggested that this had occurred during an actual or attempted forcible rape. When last seen alive, Howard had been with defendant, and his fingerprints were found inside her automobile. The prosecution introduced evidence that defendant had raped and killed another young woman, Tiffany Frizzell, three months before Howard met her death.

A. Prosecution's Guilt Phase Case-in-Chief

In December 1983, Antaya Howard was living with her parents at their home in Huntington Beach. She owned an orange Datsun automobile. On the evening of December 29, after 10 p.m., she drove to a bar in Huntington Beach called the Bee Hive. On the same day, December 29, 1983, defendant was staying temporarily at the Huntington Beach apartment of Kenton Wheeler, who had known defendant since childhood. Defendant left Wheeler's apartment around 10 p.m. wearing a sweater he had borrowed from Wheeler. Defendant also went to the Bee Hive. The bartender recognized Howard and defendant as previous customers, but she had not seen them together before.

In the Bee Hive, defendant sat at the bar next to Howard; they talked and drank beer. Around 1:15 a.m., defendant and Howard left the Bee Hive together, returning around 1:45. Both were showing the effects of alcohol or some other intoxicating substance, but neither appeared extremely high, and defendant seemed less impaired than Howard. Defendant and Howard each wanted another beer, but the bartender refused to serve them because they had missed the last call for drinks before the 2 a.m. closing time. Defendant and Howard departed again.

Defendant and Howard were next seen at Charlie's Chili, an all-night restaurant in Newport Beach. There, between 2 and 4 a.m., defendant and Howard drank a bottle of champagne in the company of a man with sandy hair. Howard had locked her keys in her car, but she managed to open the car using a butter knife that she borrowed from a restaurant employee. The sandy-haired man left by himself in his own car. One witness, a restaurant customer, testified that defendant and Howard left in Howard's car, with defendant driving. Another witness, a restaurant employee, testified that defendant and Howard walked toward the beach after leaving the restaurant.

Howard did not return home that night and was never seen alive again. Defendant had not returned to Wheeler's apartment at 6 a.m. on December 30 when Wheeler left for work.

Around 7 a.m. on December 30, a woman noticed a car parked in an alley behind her Huntington Beach house; this car eventually proved to be Howard's.

When Wheeler returned to his apartment at 4:30 p.m. on December 30, he found defendant in the shower. The sweater defendant had borrowed was soiled and stained on the front and arms, and the room in which defendant had slept held a very strong and sour body odor. Defendant told Wheeler he did not know why the room smelled so bad. Defendant immediately moved out and took a room in a hotel, where he stayed only one night.

On January 3, 1984, a parking control officer ticketed Howard's car for illegal parking. It was still parked in the same Huntington Beach alley where it had been observed on December 30. The next day, the woman who had first noted the car's presence observed that it was emitting a strong odor. She notified the police, who found Howard's body, covered by a blanket, on the floor behind the front seat. Her blouse had been pulled back and was missing a button. Her bra was still clasped but was twisted and above her breasts. Her jeans and panties were around her ankles. There was mud and dirt on the knees, the left side, and the back of the jeans, and also on the upper left part of Howard's body.

Defendant's fingerprints were found in Howard's car on the left and right car door windows and on an empty beer can on the front passenger seat floorboard.

The autopsy surgeon testified that the cause of Howard's death was asphyxiation due to strangulation, with blunt force injury to the head as a contributing factor. He found abrasions "in the left forehead and also over the left eyebrow area, and also in the left thigh area," and he noted bruises "over the left eyebrow, over the left eyelid, left cheek area, the left leg" and "in the back of the head and in the back of the body." Howard's skull was not fractured, but she had suffered a subarachnoid hemorrhage that could have been fatal had she not died first of strangulation. No semen or sperm was found on or in the body, but decomposition could have made semen and sperm undetectable.

On January 6, 1984, defendant surrendered to the Laguna Beach Police Department on traffic warrants. On January 10, 1984, Huntington Beach police officers interviewed defendant about Howard. Defendant claimed he did not know Howard; he was unable to explain the presence of his fingerprints in her car.

The prosecution introduced evidence that in September 1983, three months before Howard was killed, defendant had raped and killed a 19-year-old woman named Tiffany Frizzell. Her body had been found on the bed in her Long Beach motel room on September 17, 1983. The belt used to strangle her was around her neck. The only clothing on the body was a blouse pulled over Frizzell's face. The body was covered by a bedspread, but the bedding was otherwise undisturbed. Defendant's fingerprint was found on a telephone in the room. Semen and sperm were found in Frizzell's vagina and external genital area. On September 19, 1983, a canvas bag containing clothing and other personal property belonging to Frizzell was found in some bushes at a Long Beach residence. A witness, Loveda N., testified that she had seen the same canvas bag, containing many of the same objects, in defendant's van. One of the objects found in the bag was a book in which Frizzell had written her name and which bore defendant's fingerprints. On October 13, 1983, defendant pawned a radio that had belonged to Frizzell.

B. Defense Case at the Guilt Phase

The only defense witness was a toxicologist who testified to the presence of cocaine or a cocaine metabolite in blood taken from Howard's body after her death.

C. Penalty Phase

The prosecution introduced evidence that defendant had assaulted June M. and Loveda N.

June M. met defendant in a Long Beach bar around 11 p.m. on June 13, 1981, when she was 23 years old. Defendant invited June to view his truck, which was parked nearby. When she was seated in the front passenger seat, ostensibly to listen to the stereo, defendant started the truck and drove to a residential area. June tried to open the passenger door but was unable to do so because the door and window handles were missing. Defendant ignored her demands to be taken back to the bar. Defendant pushed her into the back of the truck and ripped off her clothes.

June M. screamed, and defendant put his hand over her mouth. When June bit defendant's hand, he began to strangle her. Defendant raped June. Eventually her body went limp, and she thought she was going to die. Defendant got up and demanded that June orally copulate him. June said she could not breathe and needed air. When defendant opened the passenger door, she managed to escape. For this assault on June M., defendant had pleaded guilty to one count of forcible rape and had received a state prison sentence.

Loveda N. met defendant in a bar in August 1983. They began living and traveling together in defendant's van. During this time, defendant physically abused Loveda, slapping or punching her in the face. Around October 10, 1983, while they were staying at a motel in Coos Bay, Oregon, defendant insisted that Loveda have sex with him and began to remove her clothes. When Loveda resisted, defendant hit her and choked her with his hands. Feeling she was about to pass out, Loveda told defendant she would have sex with him if he allowed her to use the bathroom first. Once inside the bathroom, she locked the door, jumped out the window, and ran to the office of the motel manager, who eventually summoned the police. Because defendant threatened to harm Loveda's three-year-old son, she declined to press charges.

The defense case at the penalty phase was presented primarily through the testimony of Daniel Foster, a clinical psychologist. Foster...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1146 cases
  • People v. Tousant
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • May 26, 2021
    ...that its admission would create a serious danger of undue prejudice, of confusing the issues, or of misleading the jury." ( People v. Kipp (1998) 18 Cal.4th 349, 371.) We review trial court rulings admitting this evidence for an abuse of discretion. ( Ibid . )C. Analysis1. Tousant's Conduct......
  • People v. Clark
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • December 12, 2019
    ...but the act need not be the last proximate or ultimate step toward commission of the substantive crime." ( People v. Kipp (1998) 18 Cal.4th 349, 376, 75 Cal.Rptr.2d 716, 956 P.2d 1169.) " ‘[A]cts which indicate a certain, unambiguous intent to commit that specific crime, and, in themselves,......
  • George v. Almager
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of California
    • September 24, 2009
    ...of such evidence to prove issues such as identity, intent, motive, and lack of mistake or accident. People v. Kipp, 18 Cal.4th 349, 369, 75 Cal.Rptr.2d 716, 956 P.2d 1169 (1998). Nevertheless, "evidence of uncharged crimes is admissible to prove identity, common design or plan, or intent on......
  • People v. Lopez
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • March 12, 2020
    ...proximate or ultimate step toward commission of the crime." ( Id. at p. 764, 95 Cal.Rptr.2d 642, citing People v. Kipp (1998) 18 Cal.4th 349, 376, 75 Cal.Rptr.2d 716, 956 P.2d 1169.) The dividing line between acts of preparation and a criminal attempt "depends upon the facts and circumstanc......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
4 books & journal articles
  • Objections, motions and related procedures
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books California Objections
    • March 29, 2023
    ...being typically raised in limine: • Whether evidence of the defendant’s prior bad acts are admissible at trial. People v. Kipp (1998) 18 Cal. 4th 349, 369, 75 Cal. Rptr. 2d 716. For prior bad acts evidence generally, see Ch. 11. • The use of prior convictions to impeach the defendant should......
  • Jury selection
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books California Objections
    • March 29, 2023
    ...as the ultimate decision to retain or discharge a juror, rests within the sound discretion of the trial judge. People v. Kipp (1998) 18 Cal. 4th 349, 365-366, 75 Cal. Rptr. 2d 716 . The court should sustain a challenge when the juror’s views would prevent or substantially impair the perform......
  • Character and habit
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books California Objections
    • March 29, 2023
    ...The strength of the inference will depend on the degree of distinctiveness and the number of shared marks. People v. Kipp (1998) 18 Cal. 4th 349, 370, 75 Cal. Rptr. 2d 716. When offered to prove a common scheme or plan, the required similarity is less than that required for identity. While ......
  • Table of cases
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books California Objections
    • March 29, 2023
    ...8 Cal. App. 3d 761, 87 Cal. Rptr. 638, §8:30 Kipp, People v. (2001) 26 Cal. 4th 1100, 113 Cal. Rptr. 2d 27, §8:30 Kipp, People v. (1998) 18 Cal. 4th 349, 75 Cal. Rptr. 2d 716, §§1:280, 2:160, 11:20 Kirk, In re (1999) 74 Cal. App. 4th 1066, 88 Cal. Rptr. 2d 648, §14:40 Kirk v. First American......

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