People v. Wilson
Decision Date | 18 December 1969 |
Docket Number | Cr. 12163 |
Citation | 462 P.2d 22,1 Cal.3d 431,82 Cal.Rptr. 494 |
Court | California Supreme Court |
Parties | , 462 P.2d 22 The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Rufus WILSON, Defendant and Appellant. |
Robert L. Lieff, San Francisco, under appointment by the Supreme Court, and Belli, Ashe, Ellison, Choulos, Cone & Harper, Los Angeles, for defendant and appellant.
Thomas C. Lynch, Atty. Gen., William E. James, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Philip C. Griffin, Deputy Atty. Gen., for plaintiff and respondent.
Defendant Rufus Wilson was charged with the first degree murders of his wife and William Washington, and assaults with a deadly weapon with intent to murder Lewis Champion and Joe Stoglin. On April 13, 1965, after a jury trial, defendant was found guilty as charged in the two murder counts and the assault upon Stoglin, and guilty of assault with a deadly weapon, a lesser included offense, in the assault upon Champion. The penalty for the two murder convictions was fixed at death. We reversed the murder convictions and the conviction of assault with a deadly weapon on the basis of errors in the instructions, and we affirmed the conviction of assault with a deadly weapon with intent to murder Joe Stoglin. (People v. Wilson, (1967) 66 Cal.2d 749, 59 Cal.Rptr. 156, 427 P.2d 820.) Upon retrial, a jury found defendant guilty of murder in the first degree of his wife, murder in the second degree of Washington, and assault with a deadly weapon upon Champion. The jury fixed the penalty for the murder of defendant's wife at death; this appeal is automatic. (Pen.Code, § 1239, subd. (b).)
Prior to the events resulting in the convictions in the instant proceedings, defendant had no criminal record. He was 43 years of age and had worked for the preceding 19 years as a forklift operator for a Los Angeles firm. He was married to Ann Wilson for nine years, but she left him in January 1964 and filed for divorce. After their separation defendant attempted to effect a reconciliation and occasionally they met or talked on the telephone.
The prosecution's evidence may be summarized as follows: About 10:30 p.m. on October 14, 1964, Lewis Champion, Joe Stoglin and William Washington accompanied defendant's wife to her apartment where they ate some food and watched television. Stoglin and Washington fell asleep in the living room, While Champion continued to watch television. There were several telephone calls within the next hour which were answered by Mrs. Wilson. Champion answered a later call from defendant, but Mrs. Wilson told him to hang up. Champion told defendant that his wife was in the bathroom and defendant hung up. Champion denied saying anything further to defendant.
A few minutes later Champion saw automobile lights shining in the driveway to the apartment and immediately thereafter heard the sound of breaking glass from the window on the door at the bottom of the stairs of the building. Mrs. Wilson ran to a bedroom phone and called the police. She threw a pistol down on the bed along with some bullets, but the bullets were too small and Champion was unable to load the pistol. Defendant broke into the apartment with a shotgun in his hand and pointed it at Champion, who dropped his gun and put up his hands.
Champion pleaded that he did not know why defendant had come, but that he had nothing to do with the situation. Defendant said, 'All right, let's go.' Champion pulled the sleeping Stoglin off the couch, and they left the apartment and started down the stairs. Champion rushed out of the building and fled. Stoglin, who had followed Champion, was shot and wounded as he descended the stairs. 1
A neighbor who lived in the adjoining apartment heard glass shatter, the sound of someone running up the stairs, the splintering of the door to the Wilson apartment, a shot followed by a female scream, and then, several seconds later, five or six shots. She then heard someone slowly descending the stairs and someone say, 'Sorry it had to end like this.' When she looked out the window a moment later, she saw a truck quickly backing out of the driveway. Other neighbors also heard shots, and saw Stoglin fall down the stairs and lie at the base of the stairway. After two more shots, they saw Washington come down the stairs, stumble over Stoglin and fall behind a bush beside the driveway.
Before defendant had gone two blocks, a police car arrived at the scene of the shooting in response to a radio call, and the officers pursued defendant and stopped him about three blocks from Mrs. Wilson's apartment. One of the officers had defendant put his hands on the wall of a building and searched him for weapons, but found none. In accordance with information supplied by defendant, a shotgun and shell were found in the truck bed. Defendant's hand was bleeding, and there was blood on the gun and his clothing.
Defendant was placed under arrest. He was told that he had the right to remain silent and the right to presence of an attorney before making any statements and that any statements he made could be used against him at future criminal proceedings. After defendant was handcuffed, he stated in response to questions by an officer that the shotgun belonged to him, that he had talked to his wife about an hour earlier, that a male voice had interrupted and told him to get lost and leave her alone, that he loaded the shotgun and went to his wife's apartment, that he broke into the apartment, saw three males and one female and shot at them, that one of the males pleaded with him not to shoot and that he let him pass by. Defendant also stated that he was a good shot with the shotgun and used it rather than an automatic because he could shoot more accurately at close range, and that had he known there was another shell in the truck, he would have used that one too.
Other police officers arrived at Mrs. Wilson's apartment and found Washington lying on the lawn underneath a bush and Stoglin lying in front of the door. Stoglin had a gunshot wound in the back; there was expert testimony that Stoglin was shot from a distance of 10 to 15 feet. An autopsy revealed that Washington suffered three wounds, in the left forearm, the upper chest, and the middle of the back. He died after surgery the day following the shooting.
The officers, in entering the apartment, found the front door open. The bathroom door had two holes caused by shotgun blasts; it was off its hinges and leaning into the bathroom. Three shells were found near the front door of the apartment and three near the bathroom door. Mrs. Wilson, fully clothed, was lying in the bathtub. She had a wound in the upper chest area surrounded by a large bloodstain. There was expert testimony that the muzzle of the shotgun had been about six or eight inches from her chest when fired.
Defendant's testimony may be summarized as follows: During the 10-month period of separation, he saw his wife on occasion and talked to her on the telephone. He asked her to come back to him, and she said she would think about it. He took her out, and he was still in love with her.
On the evening of the shooting he was playing cards with his landlady and two other persons. While he was playing, his wife called and told him that she was giving a party for him and invited him to her apartment. He asked who was going to be at the party, and she said some friends would attend. Defendant said she should give the party for her friends and hung up. He resumed the card game, and his wife telephoned again, asking when he was coming over. He told her he was not going to come, and she asked what he was doing. He replied that he was playing cards, and she retorted that he must like the card game better than he liked her. He hung up.
The card game ended when a sailor arrived to rent a room for the night. Defendant helped his landlady prepare the room, and later drove to a store to purchase some cigarettes. As defendant was parking in front of his apartment, a man in a car spoke to him and asked whether he was coming to the party. Defendant said he was not. The man threw his hat into the driveway and said, 'When you come over, bring it with you.' Defendant replied, The man and another person in the car drove away, and defendant reentered his apartment house and had a beer.
Sometime later, defendant told his landlady he had been threatened, and used her telephone to call his wife. A man answered who swore at him and refused to permit him to speak to his wife. The man said he had 'gotten rid' of Mrs. Wilson for the night and was waiting for defendant. The man hung up. Defendant did not recognize the man's voice. Defendant took his loaded gun from the closet and decided to go to his wife's apartment 'to give those fellows who had been giving me a bad time, just to scare them, that is all.'
When defendant arrived at his wife's apartment, he found the outside door to the building locked. He returned to his truck for tools with which to open the door, and, remembering that he had the gun with him, took the gun and used the stock to break a glass window in the door. He reached through the glass and unlatched the door, cutting his hand in the process.
Defendant ascended the stairs, opened the door to the apartment, and saw Champion and Stoglin. After permitting them to leave, he watched them go down the stairs and saw Stoglin stop halfway down. Having already observed Champion with a gun when he entered, defendant thought Stoglin was reaching for a gun. Defendant fired once.
The next thing that defendant recalled was being stopped by police officers. He did not remember the statements he made to the officers. It was at this time he first realized the cut his hand. Defendant did not intend to shoot anyone when he went to his wife's apartment; he only intended to scare them. He did not know that his wife was in the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. Powell
...homicide. ( People v. Sears (1970) 2 Cal.3d 180, 188-189, 84 Cal.Rptr. 711, 465 P.2d 847 ( Sears ); People v. Wilson (1969) 1 Cal.3d 431, 440, 82 Cal.Rptr. 494, 462 P.2d 22 ( Wilson ) [precluding application of the felony-murder rule when "the entry would be nonfelonious but for the intent ......
-
People v. Baker
...felony murder." ( Chun , supra , 45 Cal.4th at p. 1189, 91 Cal.Rptr.3d 106, 203 P.3d 425 ; see also People v. Wilson (1969) 1 Cal.3d 431, 442, fn. 5, 82 Cal.Rptr. 494, 462 P.2d 22 ( Wilson ) ["felonies that are an integral part of the homicide are merged in the homicide (italics omitted)"].......
-
People v. Hunter
...be an offense included in fact within the offense charged." (People v. Ireland, supra, 70 Cal.2d at p. 539.) People v. Wilson (1969) 1 Cal.3d 431, 82 Cal. Rptr. 494, 462 P.2d 22 applied Ireland to preclude a felony-murder conviction based on the predicate felony of burglary, where the inten......
-
People v. Cisneros
...33, 489 P.2d 1361; People v. Sears (1970), 2 Cal.3d 180, 185--189, 84 Cal.Rptr. 711, 465 P.2d 847, and People v. Wilson (1969), 1 Cal.3d 431, 437--442, 82 Cal.Rptr. 494, 462 P.2d 22. Cf. People v. Mattison (1971), 4 Cal.3d 177, 184--186, 93 Cal.Rptr. 185, 481 P.2d 193.) It is also error to ......
-
Chapter 7 Offenses, Charges, Pleadings, and Defenses
...State v. Essman, 403 P.2d 540, 98 Ariz. 228 (1965); State v. Severns, 148 P.2d 488, 158 Kan. 453 (1944). Accord, People v. Wilson, 1 Cal. 3d 431, 462 P.2d 22, 82 Cal. Rptr. 494 (Cal. 1969).[27] . People v. Cahill, 809 N.E.2d 561, 567 (N.Y. 2003): "In sum, we reject the approach adopted by M......
-
Martha Grace Duncan, Beauty in the Dark of Night: the Pleasures of Form in Criminal Law
...has held that the burglary merges with the murder and thus cannot be used to support a felony-murder conviction. See People v. Wilson, 462 P.2d 22, 26 (Cal. 1969). Other courts have held to the contrary. See, e.g., People v. Miller, 661 N.E.2d 1358, 1363 (N.Y. 1995). 60 Taylor v. Super. Ct.......