P. v. Martinez
Filed 2/15/07 P. v. MartinezCA5
NOT TO BEPUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court,rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinionsnot certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or orderedpublished for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OFAPPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIFTH APPELLATEDISTRICT
| THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
FRANCISCO MARTINEZ,
Defendant and Appellant.
|
F049937
(Super. Ct. No. F05900532-3)
OPINION |
THE COURT*
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Lawrence Jones and Gary R. Orozco, Judges.**
Victor J. Morse, under appointment by the Courtof Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Bill Lockyer,Attorney General, Mary Jo Graves, Chief Assistant Attorney General, MichaelP. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, John McLean and George M. Hendrickson,Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
This is an appeal from judgment following a juryverdict finding defendant Francisco Martinez guilty of first degree murder andfinding true a special circumstance allegation. Defendant contends the trialcourt erred in failing to conduct an inquiry into a juror's observation ofconduct by a spectator who appeared to be coaching a witness and the juror'spossible discussion of the observation with fellow jurors. We concludedefendant has not established the trial court abused its discretion. We willaffirm the judgment.
Factsand Procedural History
Defendant and three other men were together in acar at about 3 a.m. on November 24, 2004. They saw Johnny Hernandezriding a bicycle and decided to rob him. After the car came to a stop,defendant and Armando Vega stepped out of the car. Vega carried a .22 caliberrifle. He immediately shot Hernandez, who died shortly thereafter. Defendantwas convicted of murder on a felony murder theory; the jury found true as aspecial circumstance that defendant committed the crime while engaged inrobbery or attempted robbery. (See Pen. Code, §§ 187, subd. (a), 189,190.2, subd. (a)(17)(A).) On March 7, 2006, the court sentenced defendantto life in prison without possibility of parole. Defendant filed a timelynotice of appeal.
Discussion
Several hours after the jury began deliberation,the foreperson sent a note to the court: â€
| Description | This is an appeal from judgment following a jury verdict finding defendant guilty of first degree murder and finding true a special circumstance allegation. Defendant contends the trial court erred in failing to conduct an inquiry into a juror's observation of conduct by a spectator who appeared to be coaching a witness and the juror's possible discussion of the observation with fellow jurors. Court conclude defendant has not established the trial court abused its discretion. Court affirm the judgment. |
| Rating |
