People v. Maldonado
| Decision Date | 28 June 2022 |
| Docket Number | B308300 |
| Parties | THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LORENZO RICARDO MALDONADO, Defendant and Appellant. |
| Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County William C. Ryan, Judge. Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No A364611
Mark D. Lenenberg, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Matthew Rodriquez, Acting Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Amada V Lopez and Chung L. Mar, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
In 1981, Lorenzo Ricardo Maldonado pleaded guilty to second degree murder based on a codefendant's fatal shooting of a pizza delivery man during the commission of an armed robbery. In 2019, Maldonado filed a petition for resentencing under Penal Code section 1170.95.[1] After an evidentiary hearing, the superior court denied the petition, finding Maldonado was not entitled to relief because he was a major participant in the robbery and acted with reckless indifference to human life. Maldonado appealed.
We originally issued an opinion in this case on September 23, 2021. We affirmed the order denying Maldonado's petition, rejecting Maldonado's contention that the double jeopardy clause applies to section 1170.95 proceedings and holding that substantial evidence supported the superior court's findings. After our affirmance, the governor signed into law the amendments to section 1170.95 enacted by Senate Bill No. 775 (2021-2022 Reg. Sess.) (Stats. 2021, ch. 551, § 2) (Senate Bill 775), effective January 1, 2022. Maldonado filed a petition for review based on the newly-enacted amendments. On December 1, 2021, the California Supreme Court granted review and transferred the case to us with directions to vacate our decision and reconsider the cause in light of Senate Bill 775.
In addition to his previous contentions, Maldonado now also asserts he is entitled to a new hearing because (he says) the evidence on which the superior court relied in denying his petition is inadmissible under the amendments to section 1170.95, subdivision (d)(3). We conclude Maldonado has forfeited these evidentiary challenges. Not only did he fail to raise any objections to the evidence in the superior court; he himself presented to the court the materials to which he now objects, asking the court to read and rely on them in ruling on his petition. In addition, we again conclude substantial evidence supports the trial court's findings that Maldonado was a major participant in the robbery and acted with reckless indifference to human life. Accordingly, we affirm.
On October 10, 1980, seven juvenile members of the Avenues gang, including Maldonado,[3] decided to rob a pizza delivery man to get money to go to a county fair. The plan initially was devised by Rudy Zamorano, Martha McRae, and Lisa Gandara. They then gathered with Maldonado, Manual Marin, Ralph Garcia, and "Pete" at Maldonado's house where they worked out the details. All seven participants "were for it." The plan was to drive to a secluded street, order pizzas for delivery to an address on that street, and then wait for the delivery man to arrive to rob him. While the group agreed "nobody was supposed to get hurt," they also decided to use a gun in the robbery. Zamorano told the group that, if the delivery man pulled out a gun or tried to defend himself, "they were going to shoot him."
The group drove in Marin's car to a fellow gang member's house where Zamorano retrieved a rifle and ammunition. They then chose a house on Raber Street as the location for the robbery because it was the darkest street in the area. After dropping off McRae and Pete at a pay phone booth so they could order the pizzas, the group parked the car down the street from the Raber Street house. While Marin stayed in the car, the rest of the group waited near the house for the delivery man. Maldonado and Gandara stood in front of the house while Zamorano and Garcia hid behind a car across the street.
When the delivery man, Phillip Ares (age 21), arrived on Raber Street, Gandara directed him to follow her to the house. As Ares was walking toward the house, Zamorano approached him from behind, put the rifle against his back, and said, "Hold it, motherfucker, or I'll shoot you." Gandara grabbed the pizzas from Ares's hands. Maldonado and Garcia then searched Ares for money. Maldonado took change from one of Ares's pockets while Garcia took bills from another pocket.
After the juveniles took Ares's money, Zamorano told him to turn around. When Ares didn't comply, Zamorano warned him, "If you don't turn around, I'll shoot you through the back." Ares again did not comply, and instead stood silently with his back to Zamorano. After Zamorano told Ares to turn around a third time, Maldonado grabbed Ares by his arm and turned him toward Zamorano. At that point, the rifle was pointed at Ares's stomach. Zamorano told Ares, "I know you're going to snitch."
Zamorano then walked around Ares and shot him three times in the back. Ares died at the scene.
Immediately after the shooting, Maldonado and the rest of the group ran back to Marin's car. When Gandara asked Zamorano why he shot the delivery man, Zamorano "[j]ust laughed." According to Gandara, "we all laughed, just laughed"; "we didn't expect that he died." After the group picked up McRae and Pete, they drove to an alley, where they hid the rifle and split the proceeds from the robbery-a total of $47. The group then parked on a nearby street and ate the pizza.
Maldonado, Zamorano, and Marin were charged with murder and robbery with robbery-murder special circumstance and firearm enhancement allegations. Maldonado reached a plea agreement with the prosecution and, on January 7, 1981, pleaded guilty to second degree murder. The court sentenced him to 15 years to life in the state prison.
On January 2, 2019, Maldonado filed a petition for resentencing under section 1170.95. On a downloadable form, Maldonado checked boxes asserting he had pleaded guilty to murder under the felony-murder rule or the natural and probable consequences doctrine, he was not the actual killer, he did not aid or abet a murder with the intent to kill, and he was not a major participant in the underlying felony, nor did he act with reckless indifference to human life. On March 11, 2019, the trial court appointed counsel for Maldonado.
On July 2, 2019, the People filed a response to Maldonado's petition. They contended the court should deny the petition because section 1170.95 was unconstitutional. They also argued Maldonado was ineligible for resentencing because he was a major participant in the robbery and acted with reckless indifference to human life. The People attached copies of the probation officer's report, a "follow-up investigation" police report, and the Gandara interview.
On November 1, 2019, Maldonado filed a reply in support of his petition. Maldonado attached copies of the probation officer's report and the Gandara interview "and incorporated [them] by reference." Maldonado argued section 1170.95 is constitutional. He also asserted he had established a prima facie case for relief.
Citing to and relying on his exhibits, Maldonado argued there was "no evidence that killing or discharging the gun was part of the plan when [he] agreed to join the other six juveniles for a 'simple robbery.'" Maldonado noted Gandara said in her interview that Zamorano had assured them nobody would get hurt, and that the group didn't "believe the victim was dead until the police told them."
Maldonado argued Gandara "appeared to be more sophisticated and had more culpability" than anyone except Zamorano: "Gandara was the one who decided they should call the pizza place ahead of time; she was the one who selected the delivery spot in a secluded area; she retrieved the murder weapon from the trunk of Marin's car, carried it up the stairs, and gave it to Zamorano." Gandara also "lured the victim to the chosen spot for the robbery, thereby placing Ares in front of Zamorano." Because his "co-participants, especially Zamorano and Gandara, were the masterminds behind the robbery and were involved in every stage of the criminal activity before and after commission of the robbery," Maldonado was not, he contended, a major participant.
Nor, Maldonado argued, was the evidence-presumably referring to his exhibits, as that was the only "evidence" before the court-sufficient "to support [a] finding that he acted with reckless indifference to human life." "[T]he group of juveniles had an apparent agreement that no one would be shot because Zamorano would only use the gun in case the pizza man were to attack them." Maldonado asserted he didn't have "the opportunity to stop the killing or intervene before Zamorano started shooting."
On November 12, 2019, the trial court issued an order to show cause, finding that section 1170.95 is constitutional and that Maldonado had made a prima facie showing of his entitlement to relief.
The parties appeared before the court on July 22, 2020 for the evidentiary hearing. Neither the prosecution nor Maldonado proposed to call any witnesses or to submit any additional evidence. The court noted the prosecution had to prove Maldonado could still be convicted under current law. The court told the prosecutor it seemed Zamorano, Gandara, and McRae "were the planners, not so much Maldonado." After hearing at length...
To continue reading
Request your trial