People v. Neely

Citation26 Cal.Rptr.2d 189,864 P.2d 460,6 Cal.4th 877
Decision Date23 December 1993
Docket NumberNo. 23020,No. S004516,S004516,23020
Parties, 864 P.2d 460 The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Charles Frederick NEELY, Defendant and Appellant. Crim.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court (California)

Ward A. Campbell, Office of Atty. Gen., Sacramento, for plaintiff and respondent.

GEORGE, Justice.

Following the guilt phase of a jury trial, defendant Charles Frederick Neely was found guilty of one count of first degree murder (Pen.Code, §§ 187, 189), 1 one count of robbery (§ 211), and one count of burglary (§ 460). The jury also found that defendant used a firearm in the commission of each offense (§ 12022.5) and had served a prior prison term (667.5, subd. (a)), and found true two special-circumstance allegations: that he committed the murder during the course of a robbery and burglary 2 (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17)) and that he previously had been convicted of murder (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(2)). After the penalty phase of the trial, the jury imposed the death penalty.

In the companion habeas corpus proceeding, we conclude that the judgment must be vacated in its entirety. (In re Neely, 6 Cal.4th 901, 26 Cal.Rptr.2d 203, 864 P.2d 474.) Therefore, many of the issues raised on the direct appeal need not be resolved, and we dismiss the appeal itself as moot. For the guidance of the trial court in the event of a retrial, however, we shall address those issues that are likely to arise upon retrial.

FACTS
I. GUILT PHASE
A. Prosecution's case.

The victim, Bruce Chester, a realtor, conducted his business from his residence on Cameron Road in Cameron Park, where he also kept small amounts of marijuana and cocaine for his personal use. On March 15, 1982, defendant, Malcolm Centers, and Monte Handley robbed Chester at his residence, and defendant shot and fatally wounded him. 3

i. Pre-crime planning.

Several years prior to the commission of the crimes, Chester's daughter, Julie Marie, was a schoolmate of Centers at the Cameron Park elementary school. At that time, the Chesters resided in a different house (not the crime scene), where Centers occasionally visited Julie Marie. On one occasion in 1981, Centers appeared unexpectedly at the Chester residence on Cameron Road (the crime scene) and spoke briefly with Julie Marie.

Quintin Jones, a convicted felon, was an acquaintance of both Centers and Handley. He testified that during the week preceding the commission of the crimes, he had several conversations with Centers at Centers's Sacramento apartment relating to a plan to burglarize a Cameron Park residence. During the first conversation, Centers told Jones that he recently had committed a robbery, and invited Jones to participate in a burglary of a Cameron Park residence. At the second meeting, on March 12, Centers mentioned that a third person would be involved in the burglary, and assured Jones that none of the residents would be present. On the morning of March 13, Jones again spoke with Centers at Centers's apartment. On this occasion, defendant was present, seated on a sofa. When Jones inquired whether defendant would participate in the burglary, Centers replied affirmatively and said they would be bringing handcuffs and Mace. He also assured Jones there was cash and a gold Buddha in the residence inside a safe. Jones observed the black handle and barrel of a gun, similar to a Luger-type firearm, beneath the sofa cushion on which defendant was seated. Defendant told him he had been surveilling the Cameron Park residence for a period of time and knew that no one would be home. Following a further conversation with Centers, Jones decided not to participate in the burglary.

John Sheridan, another acquaintance of Centers, testified that on the Friday preceding the commission of the crimes, he and Gary Huntington visited Centers at his apartment for the purpose of buying some marijuana. Defendant was present, and Huntington asked defendant whether he felt uncomfortable being in a predominantly Black neighborhood. Defendant responded by partially revealing a gun located beneath a sofa cushion.

On March 15, at approximately 8:30 a.m., the hostess at a Cameron Park restaurant observed defendant, Centers, and Handley enter the restaurant and approach the counter. A waitress testified that she served the three men at the counter. At approximately 11 a.m. that same day, Chester's neighbor observed a man resembling Centers walking down Cameron Road looking intently at the Chester residence. A white pickup truck approached, stopped, and the man climbed into the back of the truck.

ii. The commission of the crimes.

Shortly before noon on March 15, Chester was home with his wife, Barbara Teater Chester. Mrs. Chester testified she heard her husband answer acall coming from an intercom-telephone located outside the house, stating that he would be out shortly. After her husband proceeded to the garage, she heard him shout, "bullshit." Mrs. Chester peered outside a window and saw a white pickup truck parked in the driveway. She then heard other voices becoming loud and angry, the sound of bodies impacting against each other and a wall, and finally a loud "crack" and the splintering of wood. After hearing her husband say, "I'll take you to the safe," she heard another voice threaten, "Yes, you take me to the safe. You take me to the safe or I'll blow your fucking head off." Mrs. Chester testified that after listening to a tape recording of a March 23, 1982, conversation between defendant and Centers (see pt. I.A.iv., post ), she recognized defendant's voice, particularly his expletive "fuckin'," as similar to the voice that had threatened her husband. The voice did not resemble that of Handley, nor did the accent resemble that of an African-American. 4 (Karen Langford, a neighbor, testified that shortly after the shooting, Mrs. Chester told her one of the voices she heard resembled that of a "colored man.")

Mrs. Chester retreated to the bathroom and escaped through a sliding glass door. Walking toward the front of the house, she heard a loud cracking noise, which jolted her. As she proceeded to walk forward, she observed the back of a Caucasian male approximately 30 feet away, near the front of the house, moving away from her. She testified that, in her opinion, there was insufficient She further described the man as tall, approximately five feet, nine inches, to six feet in height, thin, with dark brown hair. 5 She testified the man resembled Centers and not defendant, whom she had seen for the first time at the preliminary hearing and who had grayish hair. Mrs. Chester recalled the man was wearing a dark green sweater. She also acknowledged that, at the preliminary hearing, she had been unable to identify either Centers or defendant as the man whom she had seen outside her residence.

time (between the cracking sound and her observation) for this man to [864 P.2d 463] have fled from the master bedroom (where her husband was shot) and reached his location outside the residence.

Proceeding to the front door, Mrs. Chester found her keys and then fled in her automobile to the home of a friend, where she contacted the sheriff's office. En route, she noticed a person (apparently male) on Cameron Road, approximately 300 feet from the foot of her driveway, walking in the direction of her residence. He was thin, approximately five feet, nine inches, to six feet in height, with a tan and white scarf wrapped around his head, concealing his face.

Within minutes, El Dorado County Deputy Sheriff Thomas Hill arrived at the Chester house, finding a white pickup truck parked in the driveway. After Hill entered the garage, an interior door opened and a man wearing a maroon-colored jacket (later identified as Handley) appeared. After Deputy Hill yelled at Handley to halt, Handley quickly retreated into the house.

By this time, other deputies had arrived at the scene. Deputies Hill and Evan Sundby observed two men running from the far corner of the house. Deputy Hill testified that one of the men was Handley, and Deputy Sundby testified that one of the men was wearing a red shirt or jacket. Losing sight of one of the men, Deputy Hill pursued Handley in a northeasterly direction, through thickly vegetated, rugged terrain. On cross-examination, he acknowledged having testified at the preliminary hearing that the two fleeing men had been running together in the same direction.

Deputy Brown testified that he joined Deputy Hill in hot pursuit of one suspect and fired a warning shot, after which the suspect dropped into a crouching position. He further recalled the suspect was wearing a black coat, not a red- or maroon-colored coat. 6 The deputies then lost sight of the suspect and halted their pursuit.

Meanwhile, Deputy Sundby proceeded to the far corner of the residence from where the two men had fled, and observed an open sliding glass door. Upon entering, he found Chester, dead and handcuffed, on the floor of the master bedroom. The safe had not been opened, but the room had been ransacked. There was a .22-caliber gunshot wound to the back of Chester's head and another gunshot wound in his left arm.

Shortly thereafter, Handley was spotted by aircraft near a pond situated to the northeast of the Chester residence. Deputy Hill drove to that vicinity, walked to the pond, and saw Handley motioning to him with his hands. After Handley was taken into custody, the police found in his pockets a latex surgical glove, a golfer's glove, items taken from the Chester residence, and two $100 bills, the same denomination and number of bills that Mrs. Chester had seen in her husband's wallet the previous evening.

Centers was apprehended within a half hour, while running through a field less than one mile from the Chester residence. He Law enforcement officers undertook a roadway and aerial search of the area. Defendant...

To continue reading

Request your trial
63 cases
  • Ross v. Davis
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • March 25, 2022
    ...circumstances, under instructions that required a finding of a shared intent to kill. Id. ; see also People v. Neely , 6 Cal. 4th 877, 898, 26 Cal.Rptr.2d 189, 864 P.2d 460 (1993) (holding that a felony-murder special circumstance instruction "properly required that the jury find that defen......
  • People v. Neely
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • March 9, 1999
    ...loosed upon the populace in 1975 and thereafter committed a home-invasion robbery-murder on March 15, 1982. (People v. Neely (1993) 6 Cal.4th 877, 26 Cal.Rptr.2d 189, 864 P.2d 460.) The authorities turned a codefendant, Malcolm Centers, against defendant and arranged for a taped conversatio......
  • People v. Gurule
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • July 22, 2002
    ...special verdicts. (People v. Davis (1995) 10 Cal.4th 463, 511-512, 41 Cal. Rptr.2d 826, 896 P.2d 119; People v. Neely (1993) 6 Cal.4th 877, 897-898, 26 Cal. Rptr.2d 189, 864 P.2d 460.) Such verdict forms are permissible because they do not ask the jury merely to make factual findings while ......
  • People v. Burney
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • July 30, 2009
    ...instruction, and the trial court's failure to so instruct the jury did not constitute error. (People v. Neely (1993) 6 Cal.4th 877, 897, 26 Cal.Rptr.2d 189, 864 P.2d 460.) Nor is there substantial evidence to support an instruction on any lesser included offenses of robbery on the basis tha......
  • 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