People v. Currie

104 Cal.Rptr.2d 430 (1st Dist. 2001)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Jurica and Maldonado were in a car, selling drugs in front of a house on Eighth Street in the City of Pittsburg. D waved at them, approached, and began talking to Maldonado. They argued about the ownership of a .357-caliber handgun that Maldonado possessed. D claimed the gun was his, and that he had loaned it to their mutual acquaintance Silva, who had, in turn, loaned it to Maldonado. D wanted it back. Maldonado claimed to have purchased the gun from Silva. The two men went inside to see Silva and resolve their dispute. When Maldonado and D returned to the parked car, D discovered that Maldonado had a gun. D asked how much 'crank' (methamphetamine) he would sell for a 'C note' ($100). Maldonado replied and D went off to get the money. D returned, not with money but with a gun. D shot Maldonado in the neck. Jurica had been listening to music and did not see D return to the vicinity of the vehicle. Suddenly she heard the discharge of a gun. Jurica turned to see Maldonado slumped and immobile and, at the same time, appellant standing outside the car, holding a gun and looking 'angry and shaky.' D started to search Maldonado's body yelling that he wanted the dope and money. Jurica handed D $40 in currency. D started to flee, but then turned and pointed the gun at Jurica. She ducked down in the car, but no other shots were fired. Police were called, and Maldonado was unconscious with a gunshot wound to the left side of the neck; he was 'gasping for air' and 'gurgling' blood. He was soon pronounced dead as a result of loss of blood and blood filling his lungs. Jurica told the police that D was the shooter. Jurica, however, was truthful in telling the authorities all of the circumstances surrounding the shooting, including her involvement with Maldonado in drug sales, but she did so later, after learning of his death. D ran to a friend’s house and admitted he had just robbed and shot Maldonado 'in the neck' and that his victim would not be criticizing him anymore. D was eventually spotted appellant near an apartment complex on Tenth Street. D was arrested and searched. His pants pocket contained $90, in denominations of two twenties, two tens, and thirty ones. A handgun was recovered in a utility box for the apartment complex, about 25 feet from the location when D was inside the apartment complex. There was blood on the barrel of the weapon, with five rounds and one expended cartridge in the cylinder. Forensic testing showed the recovered weapon was consistent with the gun that fired the bullet removed from the victim's body, although a positive match could not be made. D was charged with Maldonado's murder; the robberies of Maldonado and Jurica; being a felon in possession of a firearm; the special circumstance allegation of robbery; two allegations of firearm use; and two enhancements of prison term priors. The People sought the death penalty. D brought a motion to quash the master jury list and jury venire, contending that African-American jurors were underrepresented on the lists of potential jurors in Contra Costa County. The motion was denied. The matter proceeded to jury trial. D presented evidence which tended to undercut the credibility of Jurica, based upon her involvement in various criminal activities, conflicting statements given to the police in an apparent effort to escape prosecution on drug charges, and a grant of immunity received in exchange for her testimony. D introduced latent prints lifted from the inside of the victim's car, which did not match D's fingerprints, as well as the testimony of a longtime acquaintance that D visited him at his apartment on the night of D's arrest, and that he did not see him in possession of a gun. Reeder at first indicated D had been with him for hours, suggesting a possible alibi, but later testified appellant had only been with him a few minutes. Reeder acknowledged that the two men had been incarcerated in jail together after the shooting, but denied ever having discussed D's case. At trial, D acknowledged being a convicted felon, and that he shot Maldonado. However, he claimed to have done so in self-defense after the victim, whom he believed to be high on drugs, pulled a gun on him during an argument the two men were having over a gun appellant had loaned Silva. D's testimony confirmed portions of evidence presented by the prosecution, such as his shooting of the victim, his flight to Drake's house, his subsequent use of crack cocaine, and his hiding of the gun used in the shooting inside the utility box. D also admitted lying to the police, telling them he knew nothing about the shooting because he did not trust the police and was scared and high on drugs. The jury convicted D of second-degree murder. D received nine years eight months in state prison and a consecutive indeterminate term of 25 years to life for the murder and two firearm use allegations. D appealed.