People v. Tafoya, S047056.

Decision Date20 August 2007
Docket NumberNo. S047056.,S047056.
Citation64 Cal.Rptr.3d 163,42 Cal.4th 147,164 P.3d 590
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
PartiesThe PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Ignacio A. TAFOYA, Defendant and Appellant.

Michael R. Totaro, Pacific Pallisades, under appointment by the Supreme Court, for Defendant and Appellant.

Bill Lockyer and Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorneys General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gary W. Schons, Assistant Attorney General, William M. Wood and Meagan J. Beale, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

KENNARD, J.

A jury found defendant Ignacio Tafoya and codefendant Timothy Wynglarz guilty of the first degree murders (Pen.Code, § 187)1 of Gerald Lee Skillman and Steven Francis Rita, of the robbery (§§ 211/212.5) of Skillman, and of burglary (§ 459/former § 460.1 [now § 460, subd. (a)]). For each crime, the jury found that defendant personally used a firearm (§ 12022.5, subd. (a)), and that Wynglarz was personally armed with a firearm (§ 12022, subd. (a)(1)). For each murder, as to both defendant and Wynglarz, the jury found to be true special circumstance allegations of murder in the commission or attempted commission of robbery (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(A)) and murder in the commission or attempted commission of burglary (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(G)). In addition, the jury found true one special circumstance allegation of multiple murder (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(3)).

The prosecution did not seek the death penalty against codefendant Wynglarz, who was sentenced to life imprisonment without possibility of parole. At defendant's penalty trial the jury returned a verdict of death. The trial court denied defendant's motion for a new trial (§ 1181) and automatic motion for modification of the penalty verdict (§ 190.4, subd. (e)), and it sentenced defendant to death. Applying section 654, the court stayed defendant's robbery and burglary sentences; for each enhancement based on defendant's personal use of a firearm, the court imposed a four-year prison term.

This appeal is automatic. (§ 1239, subd. (b).) We affirm the judgment in its entirety.

I. Facts and Proceedings
A. Prosecution's Guilt Phase Case
1. Background evidence

On February 10, 1992, defendant bought a red Chevrolet dual-wheel2 pickup truck and financed the purchase through GMAC Credit Corporation. From October 1992 to March 1993, GMAC sent defendant letters notifying him that he was in default on the loan. Thereafter, GMAC began collection proceedings to repossess defendant's truck.

2. The murders of Gerald Skillman and Steven Rita

Douglas Gattenby had been friends with murder victims Gerald Skillman and Steven Rita for years and previously had used drugs with them. Skillman was a smalltime marijuana and methamphetamine dealer, and Gattenby had worked with him in distributing methamphetamine. Skillman lived with his mother and brother on Bannock Road in the City of Westminster, in Orange County. He typically delivered drugs to his customers but occasionally sold them directly from his home to friends. Gattenby had known codefendant Timothy Wynglarz for about 18 years but had not socialized or used drugs with him. A few months before the two murders, Gattenby saw defendant and codefendant Wynglarz at the house of one John Benno, known to Gattenby as a methamphetamine user.

On May 4, 1993, around noon, Joseph Burkhart was working in his front yard on Bannock Road, two houses from Skillman's, when he saw codefendant Wynglarz drive up in a red dual-wheel pickup truck and park in front of Skillman's house. At that time, Gattenby was repairing a lawn mower in Skillman's front yard. Wynglarz asked Gattenby where Skillman was. Gattenby said Skillman was inside the house and told Wynglarz to just go in. Wynglarz went inside but came out a few minutes later. He asked Gattenby to tell Skillman he was going to a store and would return shortly. Gattenby went inside and relayed the message to Skillman, who was upstairs with Rita. Burkhart saw Wynglarz drive away and return in the same red truck about 10 minutes later.

Around this same time, Michael Johnson, a street sweeping supervisor with the Westminster Department of Public Works, saw two men sitting in a red dual-wheel pickup truck parked under a freeway overpass, less than a minute's drive from murder victim Skillman's house. Johnson saw the passenger bend forward as if to reach for something and then lean back in his seat. The driver and the passenger then both looked in the area of the center console, after which they drove off toward Bannock Road (where Skillman lived). Johnson later identified codefendant Wynglarz from a photo lineup as the man he had seen in the driver's seat, and his description of the passenger matched defendant's.

Around the time codefendant Wynglarz returned in the red truck to Skillman's house on Bannock Road, Harold Hamilton, who lived across the street, saw defendant walking on the sidewalk near Skillman's house. Defendant nodded at Hamilton, who noticed a red dual-wheel pickup truck parked in front of Skillman's house.

While Skillman, Gattenby, and Rita were upstairs in Skillman's house, Gattenby heard a knock on the front door. Rita went downstairs to answer it. At that point, Hamilton saw Rita and codefendant Wynglarz on Skillman's front porch and then saw defendant step onto the porch. Defendant and Wynglarz grabbed Rita by the back of his shirt and pushed him into the house, slamming the door shut behind them. Hamilton heard sounds like someone inside the house was being thrown around, and he told his mother, Nikki Pillon, to call 911. She did so at 12:15 p.m.

Meanwhile, Gattenby, who was upstairs with Skillman, heard a scuffle downstairs. Skillman ran downstairs. A few seconds later, Gattenby came halfway down the stairs and saw Skillman lying on his side on the living room floor near the front door. Defendant was straddling Skillman and pointing a handgun at Rita, who was on the sofa about five or six feet away. Codefendant Wynglarz was standing near the front door. He did not have a weapon and did not appear to be frightened. Neither Skillman nor Rita had a weapon, and neither was threatening Wynglarz or defendant in any way.

When Gattenby saw defendant's gun, he turned around and ran up the stairs. As he did, he heard Skillman say, "This is my mother's house. You don't have to do this, guys." Defendant replied, "I ain't taking your shit." Gattenby then heard three or four gunshots. Across the street, Hamilton heard gunshots and estimated they had been fired about 45 seconds after he saw defendant and codefendant Wynglarz push Rita into the house.

Codefendant Wynglarz ran upstairs after Gattenby, telling him to "get back, get back.". Gattenby ran into Skillman's bedroom and escaped by jumping through the bedroom window. He ran to Burkhart's yard and from there saw defendant and codefendant Wynglarz leave Skillman's house. Defendant was carrying a bag made of canvas or paper. From across the street, Hamilton saw Wynglarz drive off in the red pickup truck, together with defendant. Hamilton's mother, Pillon, saw Wynglarz leave the house with defendant and drop something into a small, nylon-like bag that caused the bag to "bow[ ]" under the object's weight. She described the object as having "the length of a gun."

After defendant and codefendant Wynglarz had left, Gattenby returned to Skillman's house to check on Skillman and Rita. Skillman was lying on his side in a puddle of blood near the front door, bleeding profusely from the right side of his head. Rita was lying on his back, making gurgling sounds and murmuring.

3. The autopsies, crime scene, and forensic investigations

Skillman and Rita died from their gunshot wounds. Skillman had a bullet wound to his left interior thigh and another to the top of his head. Black soot surrounded the entry wound on his head, indicating the gun was only inches from his head when fired. Blood-spatter analysis established that Skillman's head was approximately three inches above the floor when he was shot. Rita had suffered two bullet wounds. One bullet entered his left thigh and exited through his right upper back. A second bullet entered Rita's left arm, went through his shoulder, and entered the base of his skull, lodging behind the left ear lobe. Rita was shot from four to five feet away. Both Skillman and Rita had substantial amounts of methamphetamine in their systems at the time of death.

The Orange County Sheriffs Department and Westminster Police Department investigated the crime scene. Recovered from victim Skillman's pockets were a little over $1,300 in cash, two pipes that could be used to smoke drugs, and a closed pocketknife. A briefcase in Skillman's bedroom contained small bags of marijuana and marijuana seeds. Also in the bedroom were several firearms, including a loaded .22 rifle. Victim Rita had no money in his possession.

Also recovered from the scene were four bullet casings, all 10-millimeter automatic, an unusual caliber. Three of the casings were of the Federal brand and one of the Starline brand. All four had been fired from the same gun. Three of the four bullets recovered from the two bodies and the crime scene were fired from a single gun. The fourth bullet was extensively damaged, and thus it could not be definitively established as having been fired from that same gun.

4. Events after the crimes

About 1:30 p.m. on the day of the murders, an unidentified woman telephoned GMAC and said the company could repossess defendant's truck. GMAC picked up the truck at defendant's house around 4:00 p.m.

Three days later, on May 7, 1993, law enforcement authorities arrested defendant and codefendant Wynglarz. Neither man had any visible injuries. Found in defendant's bedroom was an empty Federal brand 10-millimeter automatic ammunition box, the same brand and caliber of casings and bullets recovered from the crime scene.

On July 23, 1993, defendant's wife gave...

To continue reading

Request your trial
574 cases
  • People v. Denard
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • December 3, 2015
    ... ... [Citation.]" 242 Cal.App.4th 1020 ( People v. Morales (2001) 25 Cal.4th 34, 4344, 104 Cal.Rptr.2d 582, 18 P.3d 11 ; People v. Tafoya (2007) 42 Cal.4th 147, 184, 64 Cal.Rptr.3d 163, 164 P.3d 590.) Nevertheless, an appellate court may exercise its discretion to review a claim ... ...
  • Dominguez v. Trimble
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of California
    • May 21, 2012
    ... ... Rocks may also have been thrown back and forth. There were several people standing in the road in front of the residence. Appellant was waiving a stick in the air and ... The next morning, the prosecutor cited People v. Tafoya (2007) 42 Cal.4th 147 and People v. Cash (2002) 28 Cal.4th 703 for the proposition that acts by ... ...
  • People v. Dykes
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • June 15, 2009
    ... ... ( People v. Tafoya (2007) 42 Cal.4th 147, 192, 64 Cal.Rptr.3d 163, 164 P.3d 590; see also People v. Ault, supra, 33 Cal.4th at pp. 1263-1265, 17 Cal. Rptr.3d 302, 95 ... ...
  • People v. Brooks
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • March 20, 2017
    ... ... ( 219 Cal.Rptr.3d 375 People v. Tafoya (2007) 42 Cal.4th 147, 165, 64 Cal.Rptr.3d 163, 164 P.3d 590 ; People v. Cornwell (2005) 37 Cal.4th 50, 8384, 33 Cal.Rptr.3d 1, 117 P.3d 622.) ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 books & journal articles
  • Chapter 4 - §1. Overview
    • United States
    • Full Court Press California Guide to Criminal Evidence Chapter 4 Statutory Limits on Particular Evidence
    • Invalid date
    ...privilege. See Griffin v. California (1965) 380 U.S. 609, 615; People v. Thompson (2016) 1 Cal.5th 1043, 1117; People v. Tafoya (2007) 42 Cal.4th 147, 184. See "When adverse comment is made about defendant's silence," ch. 4-C, §2.5.2(2)(c). While comments and inferences regarding the assert......
  • Table of cases
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books California Objections
    • March 29, 2023
    ...Cal. Rptr. 2d 691, §2:80 T Tabatha G., In re (1996) 45 Cal. App. 4th 1159, 53 Cal. Rptr. 2d 93, §§10:80, 10:100 Tafoya, People v. (2007) 42 Cal. 4th 147, 64 Cal. Rptr. 3d 163, §7:60 Taggart v. Super Seer Corp. (1995) 33 Cal. App. 4th 1697, 40 Cal. Rptr. 2d 56, §§9:150, 14:10 Taha v. Finegol......
  • Witness examination
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books California Objections
    • March 29, 2023
    ...may permit further examination by the initial cross-examiner, even when there has been no redirect examination. People v. Tafoya (2007) 42 Cal. 4th 147, 175-176, 64 Cal. Rptr. 3d 163. §7:70 Attacking and Supporting Credibility Any party may attack or support the credibility of a witness, in......
  • Table of Cases null
    • United States
    • Full Court Press California Guide to Criminal Evidence Table of Cases
    • Invalid date
    ...People v. Tacardon, 53 Cal. App. 5th 89, 266 Cal. Rptr. 3d 193 (3d Dist. 2020)—Ch. 5-A, §2.1.2(2)(b); §3.2.2(1)(a) People v. Tafoya, 42 Cal. 4th 147, 64 Cal. Rptr. 3d 163, 164 P.3d 590 (2007)—Ch. 4-C, §1.9.1(2); §2.7; Ch. 7, §3.1.1(1)(c) People v. Tahl, 65 Cal. 2d 719, 56 Cal. Rptr. 318, 42......
  • 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