People v. Mincey
| Decision Date | 06 April 1992 |
| Docket Number | No. S004692,S004692 |
| Citation | 827 P.2d 388,2 Cal.4th 408,6 Cal.Rptr.2d 822 |
| Court | California Supreme Court |
| Parties | , 827 P.2d 388 The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Bryan Joseph MINCEY, Defendant and Appellant. |
Joan W. Howarth, San Francisco, under appointment by the Supreme Court, Paul L. Hoffman, Tracy Rice and Cathy Dreyfuss, Los Angeles, for defendant and appellant.
John K. Van de Kamp and Daniel E. Lungren, Attys. Gen., Steve White and George Williamson, Chief Asst. Attys. Gen., Harley D. Mayfield, Asst. Atty. Gen., Rudolf Corona, Jr., and Maxine P. Cutler, Deputy Attys. Gen., for plaintiff and respondent.
A jury convicted defendant Bryan Joseph Mincey of first degree murder (Pen.Code, § 187; all statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated), three felony counts of endangering a child (§ 273a, subd. (1)), and two misdemeanor counts of endangering a child (§ 273a, subd. (2)). 1 The jury found to be true a special circumstance allegation that the murder was intentional and involved the infliction of torture. (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(18).) Defendant was sentenced to death. This appeal is automatic. (Cal. Const., art. VI, § 11; § 1239, subd. (b).)
We reverse the misdemeanor convictions for endangering a child (counts 5 and 6), but otherwise affirm the judgment, including the death penalty.
Defendant was Sandra B.'s boyfriend. Defendant and Sandra were jointly charged with the murder of Sandra's five-year-old son, James; the special circumstance allegation of torture murder, however, was against only defendant. Defendant and Sandra were also charged with five felony counts of endangering a child. Three of those counts related to the victim; the remaining two counts involved the victim's four-year-old sister, Wendy. The trial court granted Sandra's pretrial motion for severance, and the case proceeded to trial against only defendant.
On the morning of June 20, 1981, San Bernardino County Deputy Sheriff Dana Williams went to an apartment in Fontana, where defendant lived with Sandra B. and her two young children, James and Wendy. Defendant, who was holding a table leg, was arguing with Sandra in the front yard. James had a bloody nose and cuts around his mouth, and Wendy's two lower front teeth were missing. Defendant told the deputy that he and Sandra had been fighting because she did not want him disciplining the children. He denied having hit or kicked James, but admitted hitting Sandra after she hit him in the head with a brick. Defendant's head was red and swollen, and he had scratches on his chest. Defendant also admitted throwing a container of 500 capsules of "speed" into a nearby field. According to defendant, the capsules belonged to Sandra.
Nearly two years later, on April 14, 1983, Deputy Williams again responded to a call about a fight between defendant and Sandra B. Defendant had a cut over his eye. James had bruises over his body, and large bumps and black and blue marks on his head. Sandra's upper lip and the inside of her mouth were cut, and the left side of her head was swollen. Defendant told Deputy Williams that he and Sandra had been fighting over the disciplining of James.
At 4:00 a.m. on December 23, 1983, the fire department responded to a call from Sandra B.'s neighbor. The neighbor had been awakened by Sandra, who was crying, screaming, and knocking on the neighbor's apartment door.
After entering Sandra B.'s apartment, Firefighter Gary Becks saw Sandra lying on a bed next to five-year-old James. The child was wet and wrapped in a blanket; he was dead.
Sergeant Patrick McCurry testified that after defendant had been placed in the back of a police car, defendant said:
Defendant's blood test (taken at 6:15 that same morning) indicated .12 micrograms per milliliter of amphetamines.
Both inside and outside the apartment, the police found a substantial amount of physical evidence relating to the murder of James. Outside the apartment was a board with blood and fecal material. The blood was consistent with James's blood. In the living room was a leather belt with metal grommets and feces. There was also feces on a plastic cup near the television. Two small pillows in a trash can in the kitchen had bloodstains that were consistent with the blood types of the victim and his mother, Sandra B. In the bedroom were a pile of wet, bloodstained children's clothes and a fan belt with human blood on it.
Additional items of evidence found in the bedroom consisted of clumps of brown hair, consistent with the hair of the two children; a fan belt; adult-size jeans with a light bloodstain; a leather cartridge belt; and an adult-size plaid shirt with a bloodstain consistent with defendant's blood type. Throughout the bedroom were blood smears and water-diluted blood; curtains in the linen closet had blood that was consistent with James's blood type.
Dr. Irving Root performed the autopsy on James's body. He concluded that massive blunt-force injuries were the cause of death. The shock of repetitive injuries and the tearing of tissues led to chemical imbalances that resulted in the stoppage of the intestinal tract and swelling of the brain. James's body had hundreds of injuries, virtually all of which could have been inflicted within 24 to 48 hours of death.
There were numerous abrasions and bruises on James's face and head. His back had a number of abrasions, including four straight lines on the left side of his neck and shoulders. The backs of his hands were bruised, and there was a band of bruises across his waist. James's hips, thighs, knees, legs, and feet also had a number of bruises and cuts.
The penis and the right side of the scrotum were bruised. The mucous membrane of the anus was torn, and there was a tear inside the rectum two to three inches from the opening of the anus. Inside the buttocks, a pocket of tissue was torn where it had been sheared across itself. Dr. Root testified:
In Dr. Root's opinion, many of the bruises could have been caused by a hand hitting James. The shearing of the buttocks, however, could not have been done by hand. Of the physical objects recovered from the scene and shown to Dr. Root at trial, the board was the only object that could have caused the injury to James's buttocks. The tear in the outside of the anus and in the tissue of the buttocks could have been caused by the edge of the board being forced between the thighs and then pushed towards the anus. The amount of force required would have to have been substantial. The edge of the board could also have caused a number of the straight-line injuries on James's back. Repeated blows with the cartridge belt could have caused the bruising over the buttocks and thighs. The tear inside the rectum was consistent with an injury caused by a fingernail.
Dr. Root stated that James experienced prolonged pain before his death. The amount of time between the onset of the injuries and the loss of sensation or the ability to feel pain as a result of the physiological effects of the injuries was more than a few minutes, perhaps an hour or more. Although he could not be more specific, Dr. Root explained that the metabolic changes caused by the injuries and the onset of death would have taken hours to develop, and that James's loss of sensation of pain would have occurred 15, 30, or possibly 60 minutes before death.
James's four-year-old sister, Wendy, was examined by Dr. Max Lebow on December 23, 1983, the date of James's murder. She showed these injuries: neck, face, and head bruises that were incurred in a period spanning two to three days to twelve hours before the examination. There were also bruises on her groin, thighs, and feet. The bruises on the thighs were less than 24 hours old. Injuries on Wendy's back were consistent with her having been hit with a belt with "eyelets," and the injuries to her left thigh could have been caused by a belt. Bruises on her waist could have been caused by a belt being pulled tightly around her waist; and injuries to her thigh, back of the legs, and buttocks could have been caused by a board. In Dr. Lebow's opinion, Wendy's injuries were too extensive to have been accidental. That was also the view of Dr. Herbert Geise, who examined Wendy five days after James's death.
Wendy, James's sister, was five years old when she testified at defendant's trial. She said that on one occasion defendant had kicked one of her teeth out, that she and James had been whipped with a belt the night James died because she had wet the bed, and that defendant did most of the whipping. Defendant had always been mean to her.
The police interviewed defendant three times after the killing of James. Each of the interviews was tape-recorded and played for the jury. On each occasion, defendant was advised of, and waived, his constitutional rights under Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694.
(1) First interview
On December 23, 1983, at 12:20 p.m., approximately eight hours after the murder of James was discovered, Sergeant Baker and Detective Larry Brown talked to defendant. Defendant made these statements:
Defendant admitted having spanked James and Wendy during the day of the murder, but denied having whipped them that night. He had not used alcohol or drugs that night. Around 10:30 p.m., Sandra B. asked defendant to go to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Davis v. Johnson
...supports the decision, not whether the evidence proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. [Citations.]" ( People v. Mincey (1992) 2 Cal.4th 408, 432 [6 Cal.Rptr.2d 822, 827 P.2d 388], fn. omitted ( Mincey ).) Section 206 defines torture as follows: "Every person who, with the intent to cause ......
-
People v. Brooks
...intent. ( People v. Hajek and Vo (2014) 58 Cal.4th 1144, 1187, 171 Cal.Rptr.3d 234, 324 P.3d 88 ; People v. Mincey (1992) 2 Cal.4th 408, 433, 6 Cal.Rptr.2d 822, 827 P.2d 388.) "The perpetrator intends to " ‘cause pain and suffering in addition to death,’ " and " ‘in the course, or as a resu......
-
Lam v. Dickinson, No. CIV S-10-0829 EFB P
...and the trial record." (Estelle v. McGuire, supra, 502 U.S. at p. 72, 112 S.Ct. at p. ---- ; see also People v. Mincey (1992) 2 Cal.4th 408, 451, 6 Cal.Rptr.2d 822, 827 P.2d 388.)This case is analogous to People v. Barnett (1998) 17 Cal.4th 1044, 74 Cal.Rptr.2d 121, 954 P.2d 384. There, the......
-
People v. Rush
...and the lesser included offense of grand theft auto." Viewed in accordance with the usual rules on appeal (People v. Mincey (1992) 2 Cal.4th 408, 432, 6 Cal.Rptr.2d 822, 827 P.2d 388), the evidence established that at approximately 2 a.m. on August 27, 1991, appellant approached Bruce Ray a......
-
Closing argument
...commit an offense because opinions on the ultimate issue of the mental state of a defendant are not admissible. People v. Mincey (1992) 2 Cal. 4th 408, 446, 6 Cal. Rptr. 2d 822. A prosecutor may not directly or indirectly comment on a defendant’s failure to testify in his or her own defense......
-
Table of cases
...2d 418, §§5:80, 5:100, 9:140 Milner, People v. (1988) 45 Cal. 3d 227, 246 Cal. Rptr. 713, §§9:140, 17:40, 17:100 Mincey, People v. (1992) 2 Cal. 4th 408, 6 Cal. Rptr. 2d 822, §§1:210, 5:100, 6:40, 6:120, 6:130, 10:60, 21:90 Minifie, People v. (1996) 13 Cal. 4th 1055, 56 Cal. Rptr. 2d 133, §......
-
Witness competence
...The party claiming that a witness is incompetent to testify bears the burden of proving the disqualification. People v. Mincey (1992) 2 Cal. 4th 408, 444, 6 Cal. Rptr. 2d 822. Witness competence is a preliminary fact to be determined by the court. People v. Flinner (2020) 10 Cal. 5th 686, 7......
-
Privilege
...the attorney-client privilege normally concerns matters between lawyers and parties (or potential parties). But in People v. Mincey , 827 P.2d 388, 6 Cal. Rptr.2d 822, 2 Cal.4th 408, rehearing denied and opinion modified (1992), it was made clear that the privilege can also apply to discuss......