Defendant fails to explain how either of these cases has any relevance to the present case. Bell died from her injuries about a month later in July, 1985. We held that before the jury could be instructed that it could infer a consciousness of guilt, the trial court must determine as a matter of law whether there is evidence in the record which, if believed by the jury, will sufficiently support the suggested inference. (Id. [Citations.] ), Defendant did not request an instruction admonishing the jury not to double-count the special circumstances, and we repeatedly have held that the trial court has no duty to so instruct the jury sua sponte. ), Defendant asserts that the prosecutor in closing argument in effect told the jury to double-count the special circumstances. To the contrary, the prosecutor expressly told the jury not to do so. Defendant argues that the effect of numerous errors committed during the guilt phase of the trial rendered the penalty determination unreliable. This court cannot guarantee that such result will not happen anyway; it can only attempt to safeguard against it. The court stated that it had informed Mr. Ramirez that neither Daniel Hernandez nor Arturo Hernandez have the legal experience which would qualify them to be appointed by this court to represent him in this case, nor do either attorney meet the qualifications set forth by the Los Angeles County Bar for the indigent criminal defense appointment panel.. In several instances, surviving witnesses testified that defendant demanded money or other items of value during the crime. This was problematic for investigators because that would mean the killer could just change his shoe, and the lead would go cold. A man repeated, Help me, help me. The dispatcher sent an ambulance, which arrived within five minutes. Arturo Hernandez: We understand fully; and, for the record, we have indicated to the court in the past that at this point we anticipate no conflict of interest. Best of 191, 800 P.2d 547.) It also has been brought to the court's attention that there is presently pending in Superior Court of Santa Clara County a hearing set for November 12 in the case of People versus Pinon where the district attorney's office has asked the court for-has asked for monetary sanctions against Mr. Daniel Hernandez for his failure to appear at the hearing in the Pinon case. ] (People v. Ward, supra, 36 Cal.4th at p. 220, 30 Cal.Rptr.3d 464, 114 P.3d 717.). Richard Ramirez Ms. Evans now handles the legendary pianist and composer's estate along with attorney Steven Lowy and others. Best of 2022 Top 250 Movies Most Popular Movies Top 250 TV Shows Most Popular TV Shows Most Popular Video Games Most Popular Music Videos Most Popular Podcasts. Maxine Zazzara The jury resumed deliberations the following day, August 16, 1989, but defendant moved to suspend deliberations to allow the jury a period of mourning. As she got up, she heard a muffled loud sound. She ran around to the front of the condominium complex and saw defendant leaving the complex. See below for 10 of the most shocking facts presented in the docuseries, available on Netflix now. 2. He had been shot in the head from close range. [Citations. At a subsequent autopsy, a .22-caliber bullet was retrieved from Okazaki's skull. According to Dr. Minter, therefore, the absolute disparity between the 14 percent of persons who appeared for jury service and identified themselves as Hispanic and the 16.3 percent of the population within the 20-mile radius who were Hispanics who were eligible for jury service was just 2.3 percent. She had been shot twice in the chest at close range and was pronounced dead at the hospital. [Defense Counsel]: Your honor, he has already made an I.D. Maxine Zazzara (People v. Bradford (1997) 15 Cal.4th 1229, 1314, fn. On August 14, 1989, the jury was unable to begin deliberations because one of the jurors, Phyllis Singletary, failed to appear. The Sixth Amendment commands that the accused be defended by the counsel he believes to be best. (United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez, supra, 548 U.S. at ----, 126 S.Ct. She had multiple skull fractures, which could have been caused by a tire iron that had been left by her bed. Mr. I think this is just-. lihtc compliance checklist. [] The Court: I don't think there is any doubt but that that is true, and I accept that that is true. The court then admitted several exhibits without foundation, stating: I've got to have some kind of record.. 664, 58 L.Ed.2d 579; People v. Burgener (2003) 29 Cal.4th 833, 855, 129 Cal.Rptr.2d 747, 62 P.3d 1.) Maxine Zazzara - Biography - IMDb ] (People v. Panah, supra, 35 Cal.4th 395, 447, 25 Cal.Rptr.3d 672, 107 P.3d 790. As explained above, reversal of the judgment is not required because there were no significant errors in defendant's trial. [Citation. The prosecution conceded that the two charges related to Higgins were not properly joined and the court granted the prosecution's motion to dismiss those charges. The defense did not contest that defendant was a burglar. He brought her son from the closet and handcuffed them together to the bed. (People v. Coleman, supra, 46 Cal.3d 749, 776, 251 Cal.Rptr. You are free to assign whatever moral or sympathetic value you deem appropriate to each and all of the various factors you are permitted to consider. Maxine Zazzara was born on 15 May 1940 in Arkansas, USA. We have conducted extensive conversations with him. April 14, 1985: Ramirez slipped into the Monterey Park home of Bill Doi and his disabled After defendant left, Yu crawled a short distance and then lay still. He may have entered through an unlocked doggie door in the back door. Because the jury was instructed to determine only whether defendant entered the residence with the specific intent to commit larceny, we do not consider whether the evidence that Okazaki was found with her blouse pulled up would have supported a finding that defendant entered the residence with intent to commit a sexual offense. Virginia Petersen later identified defendant at a lineup and at trial. [] Under the federal Constitution, when counsel suffers from an actual conflict of interest, prejudice is presumed. Defendant's claim also fails on the merits. WebMadison, Wisconsin white page directory listings include full name, phone number and address. Arthur Davidson, Asst. L[.] Proc., 233, 234.) (a).) Raymond Arce, Director of Jury Management, Office of the Jury Commissioner, testified that each fiscal year, usually in May, a master list of potential jurors in Los Angeles County is compiled using records from the county registrar of voters and the California Department of Motor Vehicles. Okazaki's roommate, Maria Hernandez, was shown a photographic lineup that did not include defendant's photograph, and she said one of the photographs resembled her attacker. 558-559, 15 Cal.Rptr.3d 743, 93 P.3d 344.] (People v. Gray, supra, 37 Cal.4th 168, 237, 33 Cal.Rptr.3d 451, 118 P.3d 496; People v. Martinez (2003) 31 Cal.4th 673, 703, 3 Cal.Rptr.3d 648, 74 P.3d 748. The Court: Would you like him to stand? Defendant entered holding a gun and ordered her to be quiet. He ran out of the apartment and called the police. Defendant admits, however, that [c]ounsel's failure to present mitigating evidence on appellant's behalf was not explained on the record. Defendant offers no support for his assertion that the likely cause of his attorneys' decision not to present further evidence at the penalty phase was a conflict of interest caused by his family, and we decline to speculate. Investigators were close to apprehending Ramirez several times. Do you realize the contract may contain certain provisions which may create potential areas of conflict between you and your attorneys? That guarantee mandates that the pools from which juries are drawn must not systematically exclude distinctive groups in the community. The court noted that although the survey indicated that nearly all of those surveyed had heard of the case, and about half said they thought defendant was responsible based upon what they had heard, the survey did not show that the people polled were predisposed or prejudiced. Defendant left the car and ran down the street. The Court: All right. ] (People v. Williams (1997) 16 Cal.4th 635, 667, 66 Cal.Rptr.2d 573, 941 P.2d 752.) 1692, the trial court denied the defendant's request to substitute counsel because it found that the proposed attorney had an irreconcilable conflict of interest that the defendant was not permitted to waive. Her pajama top had been pulled up, exposing her breasts, and her pajama bottoms had been pulled down around her ankles. Arturo Hernandez: We realize that, your honor, and we are willing to undertake that risk. A little over a week later, Ramirez murdered 64-year-old Vincent Zazzara and his 44-year-old wife, Maxine. An ambulance arrived and took him to the hospital where he was pronounced dead. Defendant argued in his opening brief that the trial court erred in denying his motion for sequestered voir dire of the jury. Family (2) See also Other Works | Publicity Listings | Official Sites View agent, publicist, legal and company contact details on IMDbPro Under these circumstances, the court did not err in denying defense counsel's motion to appoint a psychiatrist to evaluate defendant. To the contrary, the United States Supreme Court has just reiterated that an element of a defendant's right to counsel is the right of a defendant who does not require appointed counsel to choose who will represent him. The Defendant: Yes. When asked in the juror questionnaire what, if anything, they had learned about the case, they indicated, at most, only the most general familiarity with the case.5 They all stated that this information did not make them favor either the prosecution or the defense. (190.2.) The photographs also clarified the coroner's testimony. Defendant submitted the following proposed jury instruction: Statements by some jurors during jury selection showed an awareness of news reports concerning other cases where sentences of death were not carried out for legal reasons or where persons sentenced to life imprisonment have been considered for parole. It later was determined that two .22-caliber bullets removed from Maxine Zazzara's head and neck had been fired from the same gun later used to kill Chainarong K. Police discovered that the screen had been removed from a patio window at the Zazzara residence, which had been pried open. I will have to judge each case by its own merits.. Night Stalker victim had eyes gouged out, witness says She is professional, personable, responsive, scrappy, [Citation. Duenas grabbed a telephone to call the police and returned to the balcony. Bill Evans Biography (People v. Young (2005) 34 Cal.4th 1149, 1225, 24 Cal.Rptr.3d 112, 105 P.3d 487; People v. Barnett (1998) 17 Cal.4th 1044, 1180, 74 Cal.Rptr.2d 121, 954 P.2d 384; People v. Cain (1995) 10 Cal.4th 1, 68, 40 Cal.Rptr.2d 481, 892 P.2d 1224. On July 25, 1989, during the closing arguments of counsel, one of the jurors sent the court a note that read as follows: As a seated juror in this case, I must state my concern regarding juror #3, Mr. Defendant contends that the trial court erred in denying his request for four of the refused instructions and two that he withdrew, in violation of his rights under the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the federal Constitution. We recognized in Champion that it is possible the jury might improperly consider at the penalty phase evidence introduced at the guilt phase to show bad character. 608-223-0017. Accordingly, Dr. The court then had the following exchange with defendant: The Court: Mr. Ramirez, could you tell me: how many years of school have you had? Defendant subsequently exercised a peremptory challenge to excuse Prospective Juror Robert D. and eventually exhausted his peremptory challenges to the alternate jurors. The documentary series also delves into Ramirezs past and the horrible trauma Ramirez had to face as a child. Her throat had been slashed almost from ear to ear. It appeared she may have been sexually assaulted. The defense focused on the lack of physical evidence tying defendant to the charged crimes, attacked the reliability of the identifications of defendant, and offered the alibi that defendant was in Texas when the crimes against Mabel Bell, Florence L., and Carol K. were committed. Police found on the ground outside the garage a blue baseball-type cap bearing the name of the rock group AC/DC. The court simply made certain that defendant was fully informed regarding his choice of counsel (ante, 46 Cal.Rptr.3d at p. 695, 139 P.3d at p. 79) by observing that the Hernandez attorneys did not meet the standards required of attorneys appointed by the court to represent capital defendants, noting that both attorneys had been held in contempt on at least two occasions, requiring both attorneys to disclose to defendant any facts which might bear on their ability to effectively represent him in this case, and offering defendant the assistance of independent counsel to check any information disclosed to him. (Ante, at p. 696, 139 P.3d at p. You are now instructed that sympathy does play a legitimate part in determination of whether a defendant shall suffer death, or be imprisoned for life without the possibility of parole. (People v. Gray (2005) 37 Cal.4th 168, 236, 33 Cal.Rptr.3d 451, 118 P.3d 496; People v. Vieira (2005) 35 Cal.4th 264, 303, 25 Cal.Rptr.3d 337, 106 P.3d 990. 885, 564 P.2d 1203.) Defendant may not raise this issue for the first time on appeal. Defendant took Carol K. to her bedroom, put the gun to her head and threatened to kill her, then tied her hands behind her with a pair of pantyhose. The trial court denied the defendant's motion for a change of venue, and the defendant was convicted and sentenced to death. Citing our decision in People v. Hannon (1977) 19 Cal.3d 588, 138 Cal.Rptr. Defendant expressly does not raise an assignment of error as to counsel's conflicts of interest with respect to the retainer agreements, preferring to raise this issue in a subsequent petition for writ of habeas corpus. (190.3, factor (a).) This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. As the four-part test is stated in the conjunctive, joinder may be appropriate even though the evidence is not cross-admissible (People v. Ochoa (2001) 26 Cal.4th 398, 423, 110 Cal.Rptr.2d 324, 28 P.3d 78.). 1507, 16 L.Ed.2d 600.) The trial court did not err in failing to order a competency hearing sua sponte during the penalty phase. at p. 988, 275 Cal.Rptr. at p. 982, 275 Cal.Rptr. I briefly saw the accused captured on TV.He was arrested as the night stalker.General details given by media, arrested and accused of murder.That it is called the Night Stalker case & he was supposed to have murdered many people in So. The trial court gave one of the proposed instructions, refused five of them, and defendant withdrew the remaining four. The circumstance that there was no evidence of theft during the commission of the attempted murder of Hernandez and the murder of Okazaki does not establish that defendant did not harbor the intent to steal when he entered the residence. Defense counsel responded that defendant has up to now requested that he be given chains rather than a leg brace. Defendant's objection to the composition of the old master jury list was rendered moot. This contention is meritless. [] I am concerned with the fact that he has surely missed a great percentage of the testimony throughout this trial. I did it, you know. Night Stalker': 10 Most Terrifying Details About Satanic Serial [Citations. As defendant recognizes, we repeatedly have rejected this claim. We did not hold that Daniel Hernandez and Arturo Hernandez provided ineffective representation. The trial court did not err in admitting the challenged photographs of the victims. Q. The court relieved Gallegos as counsel and permitted the substitution. Defendant also requested two special instructions regarding mitigating factors. Paul Strand, Ph.D., testified for defendant that during the last week of November, 1986, he conducted a telephone survey of 300 persons who were eligible to be prospective jurors, using a computer program that generates random telephone numbers. Its headlights were on and the driver's side door was open. The remaining names on the DMV list and all of the names on the registrar of voters list are combined to form the master list. In the docuseries, detective Frank Salerno says, he got comfortable after killing someone he would take the time to have a snack. Police found a sliding glass door had been pried open. 1173, 55 L.Ed.2d 426 (Holloway), in which indigent codefendants were represented by a single appointed attorney who represented that he had received confidential information from each defendant that created a risk of conflicting interests, but no conflict of interest was found in Cuyler v. Sullivan (1980) 446 U.S. 335, 100 S.Ct. at p. 742, fn. When the police approached the boyfriend, he killed himself. The court then again instructed the jury that the juror's death was in no way connected with the case of People versus Richard Ramirez and should in no way be permitted to influence you in the performance of your duties as jurors as you deliberate the evidence in this case. On November 7, 1989, the trial court sentenced defendant to death on his 12 convictions for first degree murder with special circumstances and a term of 59 years and 4 months on his 11 convictions of noncapital crimes. Defendant blindfolded and gagged the victim before ransacking the bedroom, demanding money and jewelry. Madison, Wisconsin White Page Listings. We agree with the trial court that defendant's requested special instruction on sympathy was argumentative and, in any event, the proposed instruction properly was denied because it duplicated other of the court's instructions. This holding in Hovey was abrogated by the passage of Proposition 115. The trial court in the present case did not abuse its discretion in resuming deliberations the day after the jury learned that one of the jurors had been murdered. But defendant forfeited this issue by failing to object to the trial court's selection of the relevant community. 113-114.) As the trial court correctly observed, no age-related matter was suggested by the evidence in this case. A torn portion of a $20 bill was on the ground. Defendant initially moved to sever the charges into at least six groups, conceding that the charges involving the Petersen and Elyas A. victims on August 5 and August 8 were properly joined, and that the charges involving the Okazaki, Yu, Doi, Bell, Cannon, Whitney B., Nelson, and Kneiding victims on March 17, May 14, May 29, July 2, July 7, July 5, and July 19 of 1985 were properly joined, but arguing that these two groups of cases should be tried separately and that the charges involving the Sophie D., Carol K., Higgins, and Vincow victims should each be tried separately. You are admonished in the strongest possible terms that your decision in this case must be based on the evidence that you have seen and heard in this courtroom and from no other source. The court then instructed the jury to begin its deliberations anew. Again I'm not trying to jump in and tell you guys how to run your ship. On March 28, 1985, about 8:30 p.m., Polo went to the home that Vincent Zazzara shared with his wife Maxine to deliver the day's receipts from the restaurant and found the screen door unlocked and the front door ajar. [] [], For these reasons, the court is going to take the matter of the substitution of attorneys under submission until October 24, 1985, to allow the defendant to investigate the attorneys he now wishes to hire, if he so desires, and for him to have the contractual agreement looked at by an independent attorney. Defendant got out of his car and pulled Yu out of her car as she fought. Dresser drawers were open and clothes had been thrown around the room. She refused and he pulled her out and entered her car. [Citation.] Only one person (0.3 percent) believed defendant was not responsible for the murders. Sufficiency of Evidence of Second Degree Murder of Yu. Another victim, Florence Nettie Lang, 81, was beaten to death with a hammer. This is where police found their first clue to the identity of the Night About half (47.7 percent) indicated that the Night Stalker murders had posed no particular threat to them, while nearly an equal number (46 percent) said their concern for their safety had increased when the murders were occurring. Instead, echoing a claim addressed above, defendant asserts he was denied due process of law under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the federal Constitution and article I, section 15 of the California Constitution because the trial court failed to inquire into defense counsel's possible conflicts of interest during the penalty phase. The defendant's only contention on appeal in such circumstances can be that he or she was denied effective assistance of counsel. On October 24, 1985, during defendant's arraignment in municipal court, defendant turned to the audience, raised his hand, and said, Hail Satan. A pentagram and the number 666 appeared on defendant's palm. Defendant observes that eyewitness identification evidence established that appellant was the assailant in the Hernandez and Okazaki, Carol K., Sophie D., Chainarong K., Petersen, Elyas A., Yu, Doi, and Nelson incidents. The door closed behind him and Hernandez opened the garage door and ran outside. Defendant proposed 10 special jury instructions during the penalty phase. Slightly more than half of the people questioned (51.7 percent) said that [b]ased on what [they had] seen or heard they thought defendant was responsible for the Night Stalker murders, while about a third of those polled (34.7 percent) said they would need more information to make a judgment. ), Defendant cites no case, and we are aware of none, in which a conviction was reversed because the court granted the defendant's request to substitute counsel. Above the bed, a pentagram had been drawn on the wall. Hairs recovered in Mabel Bell's house were dissimilar to defendant's hair. 1692. He stated that death was a just punishment for certain crimes. When asked what crimes he had in mind, he answered: Mostly murder, I would think. He added that if the defendant were convicted of first degree murder and found to be eligible for the death penalty, he would vote to impose the death penalty unless he were convinced otherwise. While in jail awaiting trial, defendant used his blood to draw a pentagram on the floor and write the number 666. The trial court denied the challenge. L[.] Our decision in Drumgo, accordingly, has no application here. About an hour after Dale Okazaki was murdered and Maria Hernandez was shot, shortly before midnight on March 17, 1985, Jorge Gallegos was sitting in his parked car with his girlfriend in front of her residence in Monterey Park when his attention was drawn by the sound of two cars applying their brakes. They were also concerned he was a copy cat of Charles Manson. And by then, investigators knew Ramirez was watching the news, because he told a surviving victim, I am the Night Stalker.. He moved to discharge his attorney and obtain appointed counsel. Accepting defendant's position would further delay for decades the imposition of the death sentences. Administration 601 Atlas Ave. Madison, WI 53714. At the police station, defendant spontaneously confessed: I want the electric chair. In view of the above facts, the court is ordering that both attorneys make full disclosure to Mr. Ramirez of any facts which might bear on their ability to effectively represent him in this case After this disclosure, if there are any made, the court will, if Mr. Ramirez desires, offer him independent assistance to check any information disclosed to him. On October 22, 1985, Judge Soper noted that defendant had failed to provide a written agreement retaining attorney Gallegos. [] Since we are nearing deliberations, I am concerned that he will not be able to input with total knowledge of what was testified to during the trial. Decided Aug. 25, 1980. On August 30, 1985, law enforcement officers had focused their suspicion upon defendant and obtained a photograph of him, which they distributed to law enforcement agencies throughout Southern California and released to the news media. He forced her to kneel with her head on the bed and covered her head with a pillow. But I have not said he is guilty or innocent.. M Oregon, WI 53575. In the present case, there was no substantial evidence that defendant was mentally incompetent. The trial judge then engaged the prospective juror in the following colloquy: The Court: If you as [a] juror found a defendant guilty of first degree murder and you also found a special circumstance to be true beyond a reasonable doubt, would that put you in a position where in every case would you always vote for the death penalty? the benefit of a reasonable doubt prior to today with regard to his attentiveness it now is quite clear that good cause exists to excuse him because of his sleeping.. He called her names and repeatedly asked where was her money, jewelry, and other property. A hammer lying on a table next to the bed had blood and hair on it. 537, 797 P.2d 561.). Bell was lying on the floor next to the bed in another bedroom with a table on her chest. Defendant acknowledges that this court repeatedly has rejected the contention that a defendant's decision not to present mitigating evidence at the penalty phase, in itself, renders the determination of penalty unreliable under the federal and California Constitutions. He further contends that these instructions and argument rendered the penalty determination unreliable, in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the federal Constitution. Defendant tied up her eight-year-old son and hit him. Defendant argues there was an improper spillover effect during the guilt phase because of the joinder of weak and strong counts and that this effect continued during the penalty phase. Earlier on in his killing spree, there were a series of young children being taken from their beds, assaulted, and then abandoned. The jury was instructed:In determining which penalty is to be imposed on the defendant, you shall consider all of the evidence which has been received during any part of the trial of this case, except as you may be hereafter instructed.