People v. Morales

Citation69 Cal.App.5th 978,284 Cal.Rptr.3d 693
Decision Date30 September 2021
Docket NumberA159825
Parties The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Anthony MORALES, Defendant and Appellant.
CourtCalifornia Court of Appeals

Law Office of Matthew A. Siroka, Matthew A. Siroka, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Matthew Rodriguez, Acting Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Jeffrey M. Laurence, Assistant Attorney General, Catherine A. Rivlin, Basil R. Williams, Deputy Attorneys General for Plaintiff and Respondent.

BROWN, J.

A jury convicted Anthony Morales of second degree murder for stabbing Eric McMillian outside a Greyhound station in Oakland. Morales contends the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction. He also argues the trial court erred by improperly instructing the jury on self-defense and imperfect self-defense and denying an instruction on voluntary intoxication. We disagree and shall affirm.

BACKGROUND

In his youth in Watsonville, Morales had associated with gang members. He later distanced himself from the gang and, as a result, gang members had assaulted him and stabbed him twice. Morales testified against a gang member related to one of the stabbings and in exchange was placed in a witness protection program in Oregon.

One day in December 2018, Morales was in Oakland waiting for a Greyhound bus to visit his family. His only luggage was a backpack that contained, among other things, a seven and a half inch kitchen knife. Morales also had a butterfly knife in his pocket. Morales carried the weapons for self-defense.

Morales arrived in Oakland at noon. When he tried to board a bus in the afternoon, Morales got into a fight with the bus station staff. Morales had persisted in trying to get on the wrong bus despite the staff telling him he had the wrong ticket. The police arrived in response to a call and spoke to Morales, but they took no action because the security guard did not want to press charges.

Morales testified that he kept his backpack on his shoulder unless he was inside, because he didn't want anyone to take his belongings while he was at the station. However, the Greyhound station's security cameras showed that around 8:30 p.m. he stood on the sidewalk in front of the station for at least five minutes with his backpack at his feet.

Later that night, around 9:00 p.m., Morales left the station with an unidentified man wearing a beanie hat and walked along the sidewalk towards the parking lot on the side of the building. Morales testified that the two went to the parking lot so Morales could smoke a cigarette and the other man could use a vape with marijuana. The Greyhound station's video security cameras captured the two men walking on the sidewalk in front of the building, but the area of the parking lot where the men stood was not visible to the security cameras.

Less than 15 seconds after arriving at the parking lot, the man with the hat returned to the sidewalk in front of the bus station, while Morales stayed on the side of the building. Thirty seconds after that, McMillian walked by and stepped around the corner of the building into the parking lot out of view of the camera. McMillian was wearing shorts, a coat, and a red hoodie. McMillian usually carried a backpack or bag of some sort when he left his apartment, but at this point he was carrying only a bicycle wheel.

According to Morales, McMillian was taller and bigger than he. McMillian asked Morales for a cigarette. Morales responded that he did not have another but offered to give McMillian some change. McMillian seemed to take offense to Morales’ offer of change and said, "If I want your shit, I'll take your shit." Feeling threatened, Morales said McMillian could not take any of Morales’ possessions, and Morales took a step backward and turned to get away. As he was turning, Morales felt McMillian's fingers rake across his shoulder and pull on his backpack. The force pulled Morales back around, and he saw that McMillian was now holding his backpack. Morales also felt McMillian brush against him, so Morales pushed McMillian.

Morales testified that he then backed out of the parking lot onto the sidewalk at the corner of the station and McMillian walked toward him. The security camera captured Morales as he backed onto the sidewalk without his backpack, about 40 seconds after McMillian stepped off the sidewalk into the parking lot. Morales said he walked back towards McMillian and demanded his backpack, then backed away again when McMillian did not return it.

According to Morales, McMillian then said, "What else you got?" Believing McMillian was trying to take his cell phone and wallet, Morales lifted his shirt to reveal a knife in the waistband of his pants. Morales drew the knife, held it with the blade against his forearm, and raised his arm across his chest. Morales leaned back, and it seemed to him that McMillian was moving closer to take the knife, so Morales said he lashed out by extending his arm straight. Based on a later autopsy, Morales drove his knife five and a half inches into McMillian's torso.

At the time of the stabbing, the two men were on the edge of the video taken from the security camera and the details of the scene are somewhat difficult to make out. The video does not show Morales lifting his shirt and it is difficult to tell when he drew the knife. But the video does show that less than 15 seconds after Morales backed onto the sidewalk, he stepped forward toward McMillian and, in a backhanded motion, stabbed at McMillian with a knife. McMillian's arms were at his sides. Morales admitted that McMillian never drew a weapon, did not verbally threaten him, and never took a swing at him.

According to Morales, after stabbing McMillian he tried to get his backpack, but McMillian walked towards him swinging punches. McMillian fell down, got back up, picked up the backpack and bicycle wheel, and started swinging the wheel at Morales to keep Morales away. McMillian then walked quickly away, and Morales did not pursue him. These interactions were mostly out of view of the security camera, though the video reflects portions of them. Raymond Price, who had exited the building and witnessed some of these interactions after the stabbing, testified that Morales appeared to be the aggressor attacking McMillian, while McMillian was saying "Hey, man," shielding himself, and trying to get away.

McMillian walked from the parking lot to his nearby apartment building, dripping blood on the sidewalk. With blood pouring out from his shirt, he asked the front desk clerk to call 911. He asked another resident of the building to take the bicycle wheel and Morales’ backpack up to the resident's room. While waiting for first responders, McMillian said he had been robbed by a Mexican. McMillian was then taken to the hospital where he died from his injuries.

Morales meanwhile dropped his knife at the corner of the parking lot. Morales then ran away from the sidewalk, alongside the building, through the parking lot. He testified that he ran to get the security guard at the bus loading area in the back of the building but turned back in the parking lot when he encountered a plastic fence blocking the bus loading area. The cameras show him running through the parking lot alongside the building and turning back, but they do not show any fence. Morales then smoked a cigarette in the front of the building and went inside. The police detained Morales at the bus station shortly afterwards.

The autopsy showed that McMillian's blood tested positive for cocaine, methadone

, and a very low level of marijuana, as well as metabolites of those substances. The pathologist explained that cocaine can cause agitation, alertness, increased heart rate and blood pressure, and sweating. The cocaine level in McMillian's blood was significant but not necessarily fatal, especially because the presence of significant amounts of cocaine metabolite suggested he was a chronic user. For the same reason, McMillian may have had more of a tolerance and not been exhibiting the effects of cocaine as acutely as someone who had never used the drug before. The stab wound in McMillian's abdomen penetrated his stomach and liver and was the cause of his death. McMillian had abrasions on his knees consistent with falling on concrete. McMillian also had a superficial cut on the side of his thumb towards the end from the knuckle, which could have been caused by him trying to grab a knife but was more likely a defensive wound.

Morales had blood drawn at the police station, and his blood tested positive for methamphetamine and an antidepressant drug but not amphetamine

. The effects of methamphetamine are similar to cocaine and include agitation, sweating, high blood pressure, as well as some level of psychosis, confusion, and aggression. The pathologist stated that methamphetamine is metabolized to amphetamine between 1 and 12 hours after use, so the amount of methamphetamine in Morales’ blood without any amphetamine was consistent with acute intoxication and indicated the methamphetamine had been recently taken.

The pathologist told the jury that both cocaine and methamphetamine can cause a condition called excited delirium

. Excited delirium consists of excitement or agitation like a fight or flight reaction, and people with the condition will get agitated and can be physically violent against things or people. People experiencing excited delirium are also not responding appropriately to stimuli and may not understand instructions, may make growling or unintelligible sounds, and fight in an aggressive, desperate way with superhuman strength. The state may end in exhaustion or death. The aggression of a person in excited delirium can arise because the person has paranoia and thinks people are coming after them. Although the levels of cocaine in McMillian's blood were consistent with a state of excited delirium

, without a ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • People v. Waxlax
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • 9 Diciembre 2021
    ......Under these circumstances, we conclude that "[a]dding an additional instruction that [Waxlax] could have acted in self-defense if he had a fear of great bodily injury or death due to robbery would not have changed the jury's finding on this point." (See People v. Morales (2021) 69 Cal.App.5th 978, 994, 284 Cal.Rptr.3d 693, italics added [because the trial testimony and closing argument articulated defendant's self-defense-from-robbery theory, any error in omitting the robbery pinpoint instruction was harmless].) III DISPOSITION We vacate the conviction for assault ......
  • People v. Arjona
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • 1 Febrero 2023
    ...... self-defense applies when the amount of force used to repel. an attack is disproportional to the defendant's. unreasonable belief as to the amount of danger present, a. similar argument was rejected by the First Appellate District. in People v. Morales (2021) 69 Cal.App.5th 978. ( Morales ).). . .          In. Morales , the defendant, like Arjona here, argued. that CALCRIM No. 571 was deficient because "it failed to. tell the jury that a homicide also qualifies as voluntary. manslaughter ......
  • People v. Arjona
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • 1 Febrero 2023
    ...... self-defense applies when the amount of force used to repel. an attack is disproportional to the defendant's. unreasonable belief as to the amount of danger present, a. similar argument was rejected by the First Appellate District. in People v. Morales (2021) 69 Cal.App.5th 978. ( Morales ).). . .          In. Morales , the defendant, like Arjona here, argued. that CALCRIM No. 571 was deficient because "it failed to. tell the jury that a homicide also qualifies as voluntary. manslaughter ......
  • People v. Arjona
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • 1 Febrero 2023
    ...... self-defense applies when the amount of force used to repel. an attack is disproportional to the defendant's. unreasonable belief as to the amount of danger present, a. similar argument was rejected by the First Appellate District. in People v. Morales (2021) 69 Cal.App.5th 978. ( Morales ).). . .          In. Morales , the defendant, like Arjona here, argued. that CALCRIM No. 571 was deficient because "it failed to. tell the jury that a homicide also qualifies as voluntary. manslaughter ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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