People v. Perdomo

Decision Date07 February 2007
Docket NumberNo. B186098.,B186098.
CourtCalifornia Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
PartiesThe PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. GERSON ELIU PERDOMO, Defendant and Appellant.

Bill Lockyer and Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorneys General., Mary Jo Graves, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Marc E. Turchin and David A. Wildman, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

JOHNSON, J.

Appellant Gerson Eliu Perdomo was involved in a single car accident which resulted in the death of one of his passengers and very serious injuries to himself and to another passenger. A jury convicted appellant of felony vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated,1 of driving while under the influence of alcohol resulting in bodily injury to a person other than the driver,2 and of driving with a blood alcohol level of .08 percent or greater resulting in bodily injury to a person other than the driver.3 He claims it was error of constitutional dimension to admit statements he made to officers who interrogated him in the intensive care unit of the hospital while he was recovering from surgery and heavily sedated with narcotic pain medications. He claims his statements were involuntary, not the product of his free will, and thus their admission violated his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights to a fair trial. We find no error. Accordingly, we affirm.

FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS BELOW

Appellant, Marco Quinonez and Ismael Rodriguez all worked as security guards at Universal Studios. On Friday, August 22, 2003 the three men decided to go out to celebrate appellant's 21st birthday. They borrowed Quinonez's mother and brotherin-law's car, a Honda Civic. The men left from appellant's house and appellant drove the Honda with Quinonez's mother's permission. Appellant had driven the car on prior occasions since Quinonez had suffered a DUI conviction and had lost his driver's license. Quinonez was still on probation as a result of the conviction.

The three men went to a bar/club in Simi Valley called Arena Sport. They apparently stayed there several hours and consumed numerous alcoholic beverages.

Around 2:45 a.m. on August 23, 2003 the Honda was traveling eastbound on the 101 freeway at approximately 80 miles an hour when it crashed into and nearly went over the concrete center median. The impact into the concrete barrier blew out the car's left tires. The metal wheels made sparks and left scrape marks on the road as the car careened back across the freeway lanes. The left side of the car smashed into a tree on the right shoulder of the road and came to rest.

Ruperto Ramirez witnessed much of the accident as he drove eastbound on the 101 freeway around 2:45 a.m. Ramirez was traveling around 90 miles per hour when he came upon a Honda Civic driving erratically at approximately 80 miles per hour. Ramirez slowed down to avoid the car. When he felt it was safe to do so, Ramirez sped up and drove around the Honda Civic. When he looked in his rear view mirror he saw sparks coming from underneath the Honda. He then saw the Honda's headlights disappear, reappear, and disappear again. Ramirez got off the freeway, returned and drove to the accident scene.

He saw the Honda smashed up against a tree. He took a flashlight, looked into the passenger side of the Honda and saw three people in the car. They were all covered in blood. The driver was slumped motionless over the steering wheel. The person in the back seat was lying motionless over the front seat. The person in the passenger seat was moaning.

Ramirez called the police. As he was doing so an ambulance happened to come down the freeway and stopped to assist. Fire department personnel and another ambulance arrived shortly after. A California Highway Patrol officer arrived later. Ramirez watched as fire department personnel opened the car door to remove the front passenger and place him in an ambulance.

Ramirez provided the California Highway Patrol officer with the necessary information for the officer's incident report and went home.

California Highway Patrol Officer Laubscher received the emergency call and arrived at the scene sometime after 3:00 a.m. He saw a vehicle with its left side up against a tree on the side of the freeway. Fire department personnel had just removed the right front passenger from the car and were then in the process of removing the passenger from the back seat.4 Other fire department personnel were cutting off the roof of the car in order to remove the driver from where he was pinned in the car by the tree and the steering wheel.

According to the officer it took nearly 20 minutes to cut off the roof of the car and to extricate the driver from the car.

The officer testified he identified the front passenger as Marco Quinonez from a California identification card Quinonez had on his person.5 Quinonez had a huge gash on the left side of his head which was bleeding profusely. Quinonez had suffered brain damage, damage to the left side of his face and a broken left wrist. Officer Laubscher could distinguish Quinonez from the driver because Quinonez was a large man with a round face, and the only person with a huge head wound. The driver, on the other hand, was thin, had a narrow face, a closely shaved head and no head wound.

The officer testified once the driver was extracted from the car and placed on a gurney he reached into the driver's pants pocket and took out his wallet. According to the officer, the wallet contained appellant's driver's license. The photo on the driver's license resembled the driver because it similarly depicted a young man who was thin and had a narrow face. The officer testified the driver had facial cuts, was bloody and unconscious, but, as distinguished from the front passenger, he did not have a large gash in his head.

The backseat passenger, Ismael Rodriguez, was pronounced dead on arrival at a nearby hospital. He died from blunt force trauma to his head. Quinonez and appellant were airlifted to U.C.L.A. Medical Center for treatment.

Officer Laubscher was also an experienced auto mechanic and he examined the Honda at the impound lot. He detected no mechanical flaw or other mechanical explanation for the accident. He found a small amount of marijuana under the passenger seat.

Officer Laubscher also conducted an investigation of the accident scene. From skid and friction marks on the road he determined the car was traveling between 80 to 85 miles an hour. He opined the driver lost control of the car, struck the center divider and ruptured the left side tires. The driver then corrected to the right, came across the lanes and struck the tree. From information he downloaded from a weather website, the officer determined at the time of the accident the temperature was 65 degrees and clear. The roadway was dry and the traffic was light at that hour. Given these conditions, the officer gave his opinion the cause of the accident was driving while under the influence, and at excessive speeds while making unsafe maneuvers.

Appellant suffered severe traumatic injuries to his chest area. Several of his ribs were fractured. He underwent emergency surgery at U.C.L.A. Medical Center to remove his spleen. He had some bleeding in his brain as well.

Medical personnel at the hospital drew a sample of appellant's blood at 4:00 a.m. The analysis at 4:19 a.m. showed appellant had a blood alcohol level of .221 at 4:00 a.m. An analysis of appellant's urine showed the presence of both alcohol and marijuana.

A forensic alcohol expert considered the data appellant was 5 feet 6 inches tall, weighed 120 pounds, and measured a blood alcohol level of .221 at 4:00 a.m. The expert opined that at the time of the accident at 2:45 a.m. appellant would have been under the influence of alcohol, mentally and physically impaired, and incapable of operating a motor vehicle safely.

Quinonez testified at trial. He said he, Rodriguez and appellant worked together at Universal Studios security. They decided to go out to a club to celebrate appellant's 21st birthday on August 22, 2003. He borrowed his mother's car and appellant drove it to the club. Appellant often drove Quinonez's car since Quinonez no longer drove after losing his license because of a DUI conviction.6 Quinonez remembered being in the club and remembered drinking heavily. However, he had no memory of leaving the club and had no memory of the accident at all. Quinonez only remembered waking up several days later at his home after his release from the hospital.

Quinonez identified photos officers took of his head wound a few days after he was released from the hospital. The photos showed a large wound on the left side of his head closed by staples and stitches. He suffered serious brain damage from the accident. Quinonez suffered further brain injury a few months before the trial when someone hit him in the head during a robbery.

Quinonez's mother testified she gave permission for appellant to drive her car that evening because he was the only one with a driver's license. She testified appellant had driven her car on numerous prior occasions, and especially since her son had lost his driver's license.

While Quinonez and appellant were still in the hospital, U.C.L.A. Medical Center personnel gave Quinonez's mother a bag they said contained her son's personal effects. Quinonez's and appellant's personal belongings had obviously been mixed together. The bag contained Quinonez's necklace and earrings. However, it also contained jewelry and clothing she did not recognize. Quinonez's mother searched through the bag for her son's passport and did not find it. Appellant's mother, who was also in the waiting room of the hospital, identified the jewelry in the bag as belonging to appellant. Medical records indicated Quinonez's...

To continue reading

Request your trial
24 cases
  • Scarber v. Clark
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of California
    • October 6, 2022
    ... ... (4 CT 1005-08.) On November 13, 2019, the California ... Court of Appeal, Fifth Appellate District affirmed the ... judgment. People v. Scarber , No. F068908, 2019 WL ... 5958004 (Cal.Ct.App. Nov. 13, 2019). On March 11, 2020, the ... California Supreme Court denied ... 2250, 176 L.Ed.2d 1098; ... People v. DePriest, supra , 42 Cal.4th at p. 35, 63 ... Cal.Rptr.3d 896, 163 P.3d 896; People v. Perdomo ... (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 605, 617-619, 53 Cal.Rptr.3d 918; cf ... People v. Caro, supra , 7 Cal.5th at p. 493.) ... Defendant ... ...
  • People v. McClinton
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • November 30, 2018
    ...or violence, obtained by direct or implied promises, or secured by the exertion of improper influence.’ " ( People v. Perdomo (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 605, 614-615, 53 Cal.Rptr.3d 918, italics added.)Formerly, it was well established that the People were legally entitled to compel an alleged ......
  • People v. Gutierrez
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • September 24, 2012
    ...directly following emergency treatment for gunshot wounds and injection of morphine to relieve pain]; People v. Perdomo (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 605, 616–617, 53 Cal.Rptr.3d 918 [defendant waived Miranda rights while in intensive care and medicated for pain].) Unlike the defendant in Mincey v......
  • People v. Scarber
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • November 13, 2019
    ...(See, e.g., Berghuis v. Thompkins (2010) 560 U.S. 370, 386-387; People v. DePriest, supra, 42 Cal.4th at p. 35; People v. Perdomo (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 605, 617-619; cf. People v. Caro, supra, 7 Cal.5th at p. 493.) Defendant calls our attention to People v. Berve (1958) 51 Cal.2d 286 (Berv......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
5 books & journal articles
  • Other pretrial motions
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books California Drunk Driving Law - Volume 1-2 Volume 1
    • March 30, 2022
    ...of voluntariness where the hospital records were ambiguous about when the drugs had been administered. In People v. Perdomo (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 605, the defendant who was being charged with VC §23153 with GBI was interrogated in intensive care four days after surgery and five and one hal......
  • Chapter 5 - §2. Elements for exclusion
    • United States
    • Full Court Press California Guide to Criminal Evidence Chapter 5 Exclusion of Evidence on Constitutional Grounds
    • Invalid date
    ...(1967) 386 U.S. 707, 711-12; People v. Sanchez (2019) 7 Cal.5th 14, 50; McWhorter, 47 Cal.4th at 347; People v. Perdomo (2d Dist.2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 605, 614. Courts will then weigh the circumstances of the pressure applied by the police against the defendant's power of resistance. Dicker......
  • Table of Cases null
    • United States
    • Full Court Press California Guide to Criminal Evidence Table of Cases
    • Invalid date
    ...People v. Peracchi, 86 Cal. App. 4th 353, 102 Cal. Rptr. 2d 921 (5th Dist. 2001)—Ch. 5-C, §2.2.3(3)(b)[1][a] People v. Perdomo, 147 Cal. App. 4th 605, 53 Cal. Rptr. 3d 918 (2d Dist. 2007)—Ch. 3-B, §12.3.1(1)(a); Ch. 5-B, §2.2.2; §5.3 People v. Perez, 9 Cal. 5th 1, 259 Cal. Rptr. 3d 195, 459......
  • Chapter 3 - §12. Exception—Prior inconsistent statement
    • United States
    • Full Court Press California Guide to Criminal Evidence Chapter 3 Hearsay
    • Invalid date
    ...inducement. See Lego v. Twomey (1972) 404 U.S. 477, 489; People v. Benson (1990) 52 Cal.3d 754, 779; People v. Perdomo (2d Dist.2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 605, 614. See "Fifth Amendment—Voluntariness of Statements," ch. 5-B, §1 et seq. (b) Third-party witness's prior inconsistent statement. If a......
  • 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