People v. Wright
| Docket Number | B318839 |
| Decision Date | 02 August 2023 |
| Parties | THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. EDWARD JUDSON WRIGHT, Defendant and Appellant. |
| Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County No. A383951 Laura F. Priver, Judge. Affirmed.
Edward J. Haggerty, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Scott A. Taryle and Chung L. Mar, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Defendant and appellant Edward Judson Wright appeals from the order denying his petition for resentencing pursuant to Penal Code section 1172.6, entered after an evidentiary hearing held pursuant to subdivision (d) of that statute.[1] Defendant, who requests de novo review of the issues, sets forth as grounds for reversal that substantial evidence did not support a finding that he directly aided and abetted the killing with intent to kill and that the trial court erred as a matter of law in concluding he was a major participant who acted with reckless indifference to human life. Defendant also contends the order denying his resentencing petition cannot be affirmed under a theory of aiding and abetting second degree implied malice murder.
We conclude substantial evidence supports the trial court's finding that defendant was a major participant who acted with reckless indifference to human life, and he was thus guilty of felony murder under current law. As we affirm the trial court's ruling on that ground, we do not reach defendant's other contentions.
1983 conviction
In 1982, defendant and his brother Curtis Duane Wright (Curtis)[2] were charged with the murder of Donald Houts and robbery and burglary of the victim's home, as well as three additional robbery counts against separate victims. The information also alleged that Curtis had been armed with a firearm. After defendant's and Curtis's trials were severed, defendant waived a jury trial and agreed to the admission into evidence of a portion of the preliminary hearing testimony in addition to live testimony. Following a court trial defendant was convicted of first degree murder (§ 187, subd. (a)), three counts of robbery (§ 211), and one count of burglary (§ 459), along with true findings that a principal was armed in the commission of the offenses. On May 17, 1983, defendant was sentenced to a total term of life in prison plus seven years. The judgment was affirmed on direct appeal. (People v. Wright (1987) 43 Cal.3d 487, 499; People v. Wright (Dec. 13, 1985 B044607) [nonpub. opn.].)
Section 1172.6 petitions
Prior to 2019, when an accomplice killed another during an inherently dangerous felony such as robbery, an aider and abettor of the robbery could be convicted of murder without a showing of intent to kill or implied malice. (People v Strong (2022) 13 Cal.5th 698, 704, 707.) Effective 2019 the Legislature amended section 189, subdivision (e) to limit felony murder liability to actual killers, aiders and abettors with the intent to kill, or major participants in the underlying felony who acted with reckless indifference to human life as described in section 190.2, the statute defining the felony-murder special circumstance. (People v. Strong, at pp. 707-708; Stats. 2018, ch. 1015, § 1, subd. (f).) The Legislature also added section 1172.6, which provides a procedure for persons convicted of murder to seek retroactive relief if they could not be convicted under sections 188 and 189 as amended effective January 1, 2019. (People v. Lewis (2021) 11 Cal.5th 952, 957.)
In May 2019, defendant filed a petition for resentencing under section 1172.6, and the trial court summarily denied the petition. We reversed the denial of the petition and remanded the matter for further proceedings pursuant to section 1172.6, subdivision (c). Following remand, the trial court entertained briefing from both sides and held an evidentiary hearing pursuant to section 1172.6, subdivision (d), in which the prosecutor was required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant remained guilty of murder under section 188 or 189, as amended effective January 1, 2019. (See § 1172.6, subd. (d).)
The parties stipulated the court could consider the following evidence: the three prior appellate opinions in the matter; the preliminary hearing transcript; the reporter's transcript of the 1983 trial; the transcript of a recorded interview of defendant by detectives on October 20, 1982; and the autopsy report. After reviewing the evidence and analyzing it under the factors outlined in People v. Banks (2015) 61 Cal.4th 788 (Banks), People v. Clark (2016) 63 Cal.4th 522 (Clark) and related authority, the trial court found the evidence established defendant was a major participant in the robbery and burglary against Houts and acted with reckless indifference to human life. The court also found defendant was a direct aider and abettor in the murder and acted with intent to kill. On February 25, 2022, the court denied the petition.
Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal from the order of denial.
Relevant prosecution evidence
Owens robbery
Percy Owens testified that at the time of the incident he was 70 years old with a heart condition and back problems, living in a trailer on his Lancaster farm when defendant, who was referred by the unemployment department, went to work for him. Defendant worked for Owens for approximately three weeks as a handyman until Owens fired him. Thereafter, on December 13, 1978, Owens drove onto his property around 11:30 a.m., got out of his car holding a loaf of bread, his keys, and a newspaper, and was confronted by defendant pointing Owens's own .12-gauge shotgun at Owens. The gun was kept inside Owen's trailer, and he had seen it that morning before he left for an errand. No one else was around. Owens walked up to defendant, repeatedly pushed the gun away after defendant repointed it. Defendant hit Owens two or three times on the back near the shoulder with the stock of the shotgun, breaking it and causing Owens to fall. Defendant ordered Owens into the trailer, where Owens saw a window had been broken since he left that morning, and the front door was open.
Inside, defendant shoved Owens into a chair, causing glass in a display case to break. Defendant tied up Owens, threw the shotgun on the couch and returned outside. Defendant locked himself out, and Owens was able to get loose and call law enforcement to report having been beaten and held up with a shotgun. Defendant came back in through the window, again tied up Owens and pulled the phone off the wall. Defendant took a small antique pistol from the broken display case, Owens's credit cards and driver's license from the wallet in his pants, and demanded that Owen sign some checks. Owens, afraid because he knew defendant carried a knife, signed three checks. Defendant took the keys Owens had dropped on the ground outside and drove off in Owens's car.
Owens had never met Curtis, and did not know defendant had a brother.
Events before, during and after the Houts murder
In 1982 Houts was a 56-year-old pheasant farmer, who lived alone on a ranch in rural Lancaster. Defendant worked for Houts for about three weeks in late August and September, feeding birds and building cages, while living with his mother, sister, Curtis, and another younger brother in Lancaster. Eventually defendant and his girlfriend, Roberta Fahey, rented an apartment in a town 11 miles outside of Lancaster. Curtis lived with them the last two weeks they were there. Fahey worked cleaning house for Houts approximately four days.
Defendant left his job with Houts around September 22 or 23, 1982, and about that time, defendant told Fahey Houts had shown defendant his guns. On September 28, Fahey accompanied defendant to a Palmdale pawn shop where he purchased an unmodified shotgun, which he gave to Curtis two or three days later. The barrel was then sawed off.
During the following days, Curtis used the shotgun to commit robberies in Palmdale, Quartz Hill and Lancaster, aided by defendant, who provided the transportation. An employee of the Lancaster drive-in movie theater testified while working in the box office, at 8:30 p.m. on October 2, 1982, he was robbed at gunpoint by Curtis with a sawed-off shotgun. A cashier at the Quartz Hill Circle K market, about five miles from Lancaster, testified she was robbed just after midnight on October 4, 1982, by a man who pointed a saw-off shotgun at her. In court she identified defendant as the robber. Fahey testified that Curtis told her he committed the robbery of the Circle K with the sawed-off shotgun. An employee of a 7-Eleven store in Palmdale testified she was robbed on October 5 at 11:15 p.m. by a person with a single barrel sawed-off shotgun. As he left the store, he put the shotgun up his right sleeve, asked if she would wait two or three minutes before calling the police, and walked eastward down the street. She did not see a car and was unable to identify the robber.
Fahey testified that on Sunday, October 10, 1982, defendant came home between 2:30 and 3:30 p.m., upset and angry with Curtis. Defendant said he did not want Curtis to live there anymore because Curtis was going to cause trouble in which defendant did not want to be involved. Curtis came home about an hour and a half later with the sawed-off shotgun, which had a broken butt, two other guns, some tools, a television set and a vacuum cleaner. Fahey recognized the vacuum cleaner and television set as belonging to Houts. They put the tools and vacuum in the car, and all...
To continue reading
Request your trial