People v. Ramirez
Decision Date | 05 February 2016 |
Docket Number | G052144 |
Citation | 244 Cal.App.4th 800,198 Cal.Rptr.3d 318 |
Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Parties | The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Jerry RAMIREZ and Catherine Rodriguez Villarreal, Defendants and Appellants. |
Edward J. Haggerty, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant, Jerry Ramirez.
Kenneth H. Nordin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant, Catherine Rodriguez Villarreal.
Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Gerald A. Engler, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Julie L. Garland, Assistant Attorney General, Barry Carlton and Sabrina Y. Lane–Erwin, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
A jury convicted defendants Jerry Ramirez and Catherine Rodriguez Villarreal, respectively, of attempted murder and assault with a deadly weapon. But the jury found them both not guilty of active participation in the Sureños, an alleged criminal street gang, and the jury rejected gang sentencing enhancement allegations that the attempted murder and the assault were committed for the benefit of the Sureños.
In this appeal, defendants' primary complaint is that the trial court erroneously denied their motion to set aside the gang participation charges and the gang enhancement allegations under Penal Code section 9951 (the 995 motion) and, as a result, irrelevant but highly inflammatory gang evidence was admitted which deprived them of their due process rights to a fair trial on the attempted murder and assault charges.
We conclude the preliminary hearing evidence did not support the gang participation charges or the gang enhancement allegations, so the 995 motion should have been granted. We also determine the gang evidence erroneously admitted at trial violated defendants' due process rights and resulted in a fundamentally unfair trial. Therefore, the judgment must be reversed. This disposition moots defendants' remaining contentions.
In 2011, the Mendoza family, Andy, Natalie, David, Ernest, Irma, and their other siblings and mother, lived in a residence on Outer Hesperia Road in Victorville.2 Villarreal lived a few doors down from the Mendozas on the same street. Apparently, the two families had lived peaceably for a long time. In fact, Villarreal had been one of Irma's childhood friends. Nevertheless on November 15, during a dispute between Villarreal and Natalie, Villarreal allegedly hit Natalie with a baseball bat, and Villarreal's boyfriend Ramirez admittedly shot Andy.
A complaint charged Ramirez and Villarreal with attempted, premeditated murder of Andy (§§ 187, 664, subd. (a)); Villarreal with assault with a deadly weapon on Natalie (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)); and both defendants with active participation in a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (a) (gang participation)). The complaint also alleged defendants committed the attempted murder and the assault for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1) (gang enhancement); § 12022.53, subd. (e)(1)), and alleged Ramirez personally discharged a firearm and caused great bodily injury (§ 12022.53, subds.(b), (c), (d) & (e)(1)).
At the preliminary hearing, two sheriff's deputies testified concerning statements made by Andy, Natalie, and Ernest. Andy told the deputies he had gone outside the family home to help Natalie, and Ramirez shot him in the face.
Natalie confirmed Andy's story. She said she had been talking on the phone in her bedroom when she heard a car horn outside. She walked outside to investigate and saw several people in front of her house, including Villarreal and Ramirez. An argument started and Villarreal came at her with a baseball bat. Natalie cried out for her family to help her and raised her arms to cover her face. Villarreal swung the bat and hit Natalie's left arm.
According to Natalie, when Andy came out of the house and confronted Ramirez, Ramirez pointed a gun at Andy's face and fired. Andy fell to the ground, and Ramirez and Villarreal and the other people with them got into several cars and fled. Natalie said there had been a long-term disagreement between Andy and Ramirez, but she did not specify a precipitating incident.
Ernest said he grabbed a baseball bat to defend his family, but he dropped the bat after he got outside and realized Andy had been shot. A bat was later found in Ernest's bedroom.
Sheriff's Deputy Tim Jackson testified as the prosecution's gang expert, as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Lopez v. Sherman
...as an undercover drug informant was inherently deceitful.Defendant's attempt to analogize this case to People v. Ramirez (2016) 244 Cal.App.4th 800, 198 Cal. Rptr. 3d 318 (Ramirez) is unavailing. In Ramirez, "irrelevant but highly inflammatory gang evidence was admitted which deprived [the ......
-
People v. Kopp
...because committing crimes enhances the gang's reputation are insufficient to support a gang enhancement. ( People v. Ramirez (2016) 244 Cal.App.4th 800, 819-820, 198 Cal.Rptr.3d 318.)C. Analysis Here, Hernandez contends substantial evidence does not support a true finding as to both prongs ......
-
Munoz v. Superior Court of Alameda Cnty.
...is ‘sufficient cause’ to believe defendant is guilty of the charged offense. (§§ 871, 872, subd. (a).)" ( People v. Ramirez (2016) 244 Cal.App.4th 800, 813, 198 Cal.Rptr.3d 318.) "Sufficient cause" equates to " ‘reasonable and probable cause.’ " ( Ibid . ) " ‘Evidence that will justify a pr......
-
Johnson v. Montgomery
...See People v. Perez , 18 Cal. App. 5th 598, 606–14, 226 Cal.Rptr.3d 820 (2017) (collecting cases); People v. Ramirez , 244 Cal. App. 4th 800, 818–19, 198 Cal.Rptr.3d 318 (2016) ; Ramon , 175 Cal. App. 4th at 851, 96 Cal.Rptr.3d 459 (2009).No published case has upheld a gang enhancement for ......