P. v. Bobadilla
Filed 5/23/13
P. v. Bobadilla CA2/1
BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts
and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or
ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for
publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and
Respondent,
v.
ANTHONY IVAN BOBADILLA,
Defendant and
Appellant.
B240996
(Los Angeles County
Super. Ct. No. KA092622)
APPEAL
from a judgment of the Superior Court of
County, Robert M. Martinez, Judge. Affirmed.
Syda
Kosofsky, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
Appellant.
Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette,
Chief Assistant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Senior Assistant Attorney
General, Paul M. Roadarmel, Jr., Supervising Deputy Attorney General, and Rama
R. Maline, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
——————————
Appellant Anthony Ivan Bobadilla contends the
evidence was insufficient to support the jury’s conclusion that his
was willful, deliberate and premeditated.
We affirm.
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
An amended information charged Bobadilla with attempted
willful, deliberate, premeditated murder (count 1; Pen. Code, §§ 664, 187,
subd. (a)
title="">[1]) and assault with a deadly weapon (count 2; §
245, subd. (a)(1)). As to both counts,
the information alleged that Bobadilla personally inflicted great bodily
involving domestic violence. (§ 12022.7,
subd. (e).) As to count 1, it was further alleged that Bobadilla used a
deadly and dangerous weapon. (§ 12022,
subd. (b)(1).) Bobadilla pleaded not
guilty, and denied the special allegations.
A jury found Bobadilla guilty on all counts and found the
deadly weapon and great bodily injury allegations true.
Bobadilla was sentenced to life with the possibility of
parole, plus four years for the great bodily injury allegation and one year for
the deadly weapon allegation. The trial
court imposed and stayed a sentence for the assault. (§ 654.)
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Prosecution Case
1. The
dating relationship between Bobadilla and Jasmine
Bobadilla and Jasmine began dating in early 2010 when
Bobadilla was 16 years old, and Jasmine was 15 years old, and he began living
with Jasmine’s family in January or February 2010. Jasmine’s family included her parents Tim and
Diane, and a cousin, Anthony. Bobadilla
and Jasmine shared a bedroom and were sexually active.
The couple frequently argued, “usually about the same
thing, . . . jealousy issues.†They accused one another of cheating or
wanting to be with someone else.
Bobadilla told Jasmine that “if he couldn’t be with [her] then nobody
else could.†The arguments worsened over
time. Bobadilla told Jasmine he would
never let her leave him. Jasmine’s
cousin Anthony, who had seen Bobadilla go through Jasmine’s cell phone and
question her on occasion, described Bobadilla’s behavior toward Jasmine as
protective, obsessive and controlling.
Jasmine occasionally threatened to break up with Bobadilla. Afterwards, Bobadilla would intentionally
hurt himself, including cutting or trying to strangle himself, and Jasmine felt
sorry for him and remained in the relationship.
Bobadilla repeatedly told Jasmine that she “couldn’t live without
[him].â€
2. Bobadilla
attacks Jasmine
On August 9, 2010, Jasmine and her parents went to a family
birthday celebration. Bobadilla stayed
home. When Jasmine and her parents
returned late that evening, Bobadilla accused Jasmine of having gone to see
someone else instead of attending the family gathering. Jasmine did not argue with or pay attention
to Bobadilla, which made him angrier.
Fed up with arguing about such things, Jasmine told Bobadilla she wanted
to break up with him and suggested they just remain friends. He said, “‘we’re not going to do that,’†and
told her if he could not be with her, no one could.
Jasmine told Bobadilla they would talk about him leaving
her house in the morning, and turned away from him to go to sleep. Bobadilla aggressively threatened Jasmine
that she “better not go to sleep.†She
ignored him and fell asleep, which made him angrier. Jasmine woke up in pain to Bobadilla
aggressively touching her vagina, and accusing her of dreaming about someone
else. She pushed him away and went back
to sleep.
Bobadilla woke Jasmine again by rolling her over and making
her assume a kneeling position on the bed.
Facing her, Bobadilla began hitting Jasmine with a bat multiple
times. Jasmine had never seen the bat in
their room before. Bobadilla struck
Jasmine multiple times on her head and face.
The final blow dislodged Jasmine from a kneeling position. In pain, Jasmine “screamed for [her]
life.†Bobadilla stopped hitting her and
sat on the edge of the bed.
Jasmine’s parents were awakened by Jasmine’s scream. The door to Jasmine’s room was locked, which
was unusual, and they forced it open.
Jasmine was lying on her back on the bed. Bobadilla was kneeling on the bed and stared
at Diane with a blank expression.
Diane approached Bobadilla and asked him, “What
happened? What’s going on?†She asked Bobadilla if he hit Jasmine, and he
nodded his head yes. Jasmine held her
face and screamed. Diane and Jasmine saw
Bobadilla hit himself with the bat.
Diane got a towel for Bobadilla, who was bleeding from his head. Bobadilla walked over to Jasmine’s purse and
opened it. Diane took the purse away
from him. Jasmine screamed for her
mother. Diane ran to aid Jasmine, who
ran from the room, afraid for her life.
Anthony was also awakened by Jasmine’s scream. As he ran from his room he saw Jasmine and
Diane leaving Jasmine’s room. Anthony
went into Jasmine’s room; there was blood everywhere. Anthony found Bobadilla in the bathroom,
bleeding. When Anthony asked him what
happened, Bobadilla walked past Anthony saying, “I’m as good as dead
anyways.†There was a bat on the
floor. Bobadilla retrieved a piece of
broken glass from the mirror and sliced his wrist. Anthony said to Bobadilla, “[w]hat are you
doing? What’s wrong with you? Stop.
Stop.†Bobadilla stared blankly.
Anthony called the police, and told Bobadilla to stay in
the bedroom. When Anthony returned to
Jasmine’s room after retrieving his cell phone, Bobadilla was gone. He had gone out the window. Anthony followed a trail of blood to chase
after Bobadilla, and found a hand print on a back wall that Bobadilla had
jumped over. Anthony jumped over the
wall but lost sight of Bobadilla sometime between 1:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m.
Police officers arrived at Jasmine’s house at
approximately 3:30 a.m. but were unable to find Bobadilla. An officer photographed a dumpster containing
wet blood, located in a parking lot about 100 yards from Jasmine’s back yard.
3. Jasmine’s
injuries and Bobadilla’s apprehension
Diane took Jasmine to the hospital. Jasmine’s face was swollen and her face and
scalp were bleeding. She had received an
orbital bone fracture and two lacerations, one on her scalp, for which she
received nine staples, and one on her temple which was sealed with medical
adhesive. As a result of her injuries,
Jasmine had scars near her eye and the side of her head. She also had severe migraines and a lot of
of the beating.
Anthony found Bobadilla behind a wall in back of
Jasmine’s house between 5:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m.
Bobadilla had changed his clothes.
He approached Anthony holding a pair of pruning shears. The police arrived and arrested Bobadilla,
who was compliant. Bobadilla was treated
for his wounds and transferred to a psychiatric hospital.
4. Bobadilla’s
letters
Jasmine and her family moved out of their residence
several months after the attack. While
moving, Jasmine found three letters in her room that Bobadilla had written,
which she gave to the police. The first
two were hidden behind dressers. The
third was on the bottom of a basket in which Bobadilla had kept his belongings.
The first letter (Peo. Exh. 10), dated February 22, 2010,
reads as follows:
“How can I trust if there’s no trust in her, in her
eyes? I’ll never cheat or lie to
her. She’s my love. I don’t trust because she talks to other
vatos. Man, if she ever cheats on me
with my vato, I would cut their balls off and her eye and switch them and cut
her nose off and replace it with his dick.
[¶] I’ll kill that vato, breaking
his arms and legs. I’ll take out his
inside and feed them to Jasmine since she won’t see. [¶]
Fuck, I kill her too after she gets beat up by my fists and heel and
then I’ll kill her and me. [¶] I love you so much. I only want her for me and only me.â€
The second letter (Peo. Exh. 11) entitled “Suicide Note 2
Jasmine,†reads:
“When I die, plz don’t cry. I would be in the sky. So you could stay alive, just get high, to
remeber [sic] the good times that we had at night without any lights when we
made love with all our might!!! I tell
you this bcuz [sic] I have a suicide mind; but instead just comeitd [sic]
homicide bcuz you said I lied but all you do is make me cry[.] All you do is run your mind[.] I love you so good bye. So this is my life to not be alive, I just wana
[sic] die!!!! with a tear in my eye now you won’t have me by ur [sic] side but
you guna [sic] have another in your life so I said fuck!!! I want you back. [B]ut we can’t, so watch your back (anybody
killa [sic]).â€
The third (Peo. Exh. 12), dated July 13, 2010, entitled
“My Death Letter,†states:
“If you find this letter its [sic] cuz [sic] I’m dead and
so is Jasmine, yes I killed her for so many reasons I can’t trust that “‘slut’â€
I love her but she aint [sic] gona [sic] change her ways she told me herself,
she loves to fuck! . . . She lie’s [sic] about who she fucks she has a dipped
in back, she does’nt [sic] even want me she is using me she don’t fuckn [sic]
love me so I killed her so we can go together in the light so I can trust her. [¶]
She wouldn’t kill herself if I ever died I would for her if she ever
died. [¶] She said she would change but haven’t seen
changes she still talks, write’s [sic], and think about sex & lust fuck her
she thinks I’m her fool. Now chales she
fucked with the wrong vato I was born to kill since I was fucked up in the
head. [¶] Sorry I didn’t mean for this to happen but
Jasmine hurt me to the point I want to kill her I did it for love.â€
Defense case
Bobadilla testified in his own defense. Before he met Jasmine, Bobadilla tried to
kill himself more than once. After they
began living together, Bobadilla and Jasmine regularly accused one another of
cheating. Jasmine scratched Bobadilla on
three or four occasions, and also hit or slapped him three times. She was jealous of a woman named Marina,
about whom Bobadilla and Jasmine frequently argued. Bobadilla was jealous of Jasmine, and his
jealousy made him angry and sad. He
wrote letters to relieve stress over such feelings, but never meant to kill
Jasmine.
When Jasmine returned home on August 8, 2010, she accused
Bobadilla of leaving the house and being with other girls in her absence. Bobadilla and Jasmine then watched television
and had intercourse. After they had sex,
Jasmine told Bobadilla he “looked too happy†and asked who he was thinking
about. Bobadilla said he was thinking of
her, but Jasmine accused him of lying and thinking about Marina. She told Bobadilla he disgusted her, that she
did not like the way he made her feel when they had sex and that she would
stick to the people who made her feel good.
This information caused Bobadilla to feel very bad.
Jasmine went to sleep.
When Bobadilla tried to hug and kiss her and tell her that he loved her,
he saw that Jasmine was masturbating.
She told Bobadilla that he was “ruining the moment right now,†and that
she was thinking of some other guy.
Bobadilla was heartbroken and could take no more. He grabbed a bat to go outside and hit stuff
to relieve his frustration. Jasmine
asked him where he was going, and tried to slap or scratch him. Bobadilla reacted by swinging the bat at
Jasmine, hitting her in the head. He hit
her again in the head or face. Bobadilla
lost control and was not in his right state of mind. Bobadilla said he had not tried to kill Jasmine. He stopped hitting her when she screamed,
dropped the bat on the bed, and hugged Jasmine and asked if she was okay. Jasmine’s parents broke down the door and
asked Bobadilla what he had done.
Bobadilla did not recall telling Diane he hit Jasmine. He struck himself in the head three times to
punish himself for hurting Jasmine; her parents had to stop him.
After Anthony came into the room Bobadilla stabbed
himself in the wrist multiple times with glass shards. Bobadilla left the house through a window
after Anthony said he was calling the police.
He went into a parking lot behind the backyard and hid in a dumpster
when he saw Jasmine’s father and cousin chasing him. Bobadilla returned to Jasmine’s house after
the sun rose. He had changed his clothes
and picked up “cutters†so he could cut his throat. Bobadilla saw Anthony and asked if Jasmine
was okay; Anthony did not reply. When
the police arrived and asked Bobadilla to put the clippers down, he complied.
In early October 2010, Jasmine and her father contacted
the police regarding a letter Jasmine found in a basket in her room. Jasmine told the police Bobadilla had told
her that, if he ever killed himself, she would find a letter entitled “
11.) She had found the letter behind a
dresser in her room where Bobadilla had hidden it. She said Bobadilla hid several letters
throughout the house, and intended her to “find them after he was gone.â€
DISCUSSION
Bobadilla contends that the evidence was insufficient to
support the jury’s conclusion that he committed the attempted murder of Jasmine
in a deliberate, premeditated fashion.
We disagree.
On appeal, “‘“‘we must [view]
the . . . record in the light most favorable to the
judgment below.’â€â€™â€ (
466.) The test is whether substantial
evidence supports the verdict (People v.
Johnson (1980) 26 Cal.3d 557, 577), not whether we are persuaded that the defendant
is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. (
83, 139.) It is the exclusive province
of the jury to weigh the evidence, assess witness credibility and to resolve
conflicts in the testimony. (
325, 330.) We must presume in support of
the judgment the existence of facts reasonably drawn by inference from the
evidence. The fact that circumstances
may be reconciled with a contrary finding does not warrant reversal of the
judgment. (People v. Maury (2003) 30 Cal.4th 342, 396.) Consequently, an appellant “bears an enormous
burden†in a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence. (Sanchez,
at p. 330.)
In People v.
Anderson (1968) 70 Cal.2d 15 (Anderson
), the California Supreme Court established a tripartite test for deciding
whether there is sufficient evidence to support a finding of premeditation and
deliberation. Anderson explained that evidence sufficient to “sustain a finding
of premeditation and deliberation falls into three basic categories: (1) facts about how and what defendant did
that the defendant was engaged in activity directed toward, and explicable as
intended to result in, the killing—what may be characterized as ‘planning’
activity; (2) facts about the defendant’s prior
relationship and/or conduct with the victim from which the jury could
reasonably infer a ‘motive’ to kill the victim, which inference of motive,
together with facts of type (1) or (3), would in turn support an inference that
the killing was the result of ‘a pre-existing reflection’ and ‘careful thought
and weighing of considerations’ rather than ‘mere unconsidered or rash impulse
hastily executed’ [citation]; [and] (3) facts about the nature of the killing
from which the jury could infer that the manner
of killing was so particular and exacting that the defendant must have
intentionally killed according to a ‘preconceived design’ to take his victim’s
life in a particular way for a ‘reason’ which the jury can reasonably infer
from facts of type (1) or (2).†(
clarified that, “[i]n the context of first degree murder, ‘“premeditated†means
“considered beforehand,†and “deliberate†means “formed or arrived at or
determined upon as a result of careful thought and weighing of considerations
for and against the proposed course of action.â€
[Citation.]’ [Citation.] ‘The process of premeditation and
deliberation does not require any extended period of time. “The true test is not the duration of time as
much as it is the extent of the reflection.
Thoughts may follow each other with great rapidity and cold, calculated
judgment may be arrived at quickly . . . .â€
[Citations.]’†(
636.)
Bobadilla argues that, under the Anderson factors, there was no evidence of planning, little
evidence that he had a motive to kill Jasmine, and nothing methodical about his
attack to suggest premeditation and deliberation. The factors are disjunctive, and no single
factor carries definitive weight. (
247; People v. Carasi (2008) 44
Cal.4th 1263, 1306.) They are not
exclusive and no specific combination of factors need be present to conclude
there is substantial evidence to
support findings of premeditation and deliberation. (People
v. Stitely (2005) 35 Cal.4th 514, 543; People
v. Koontz (2002) 27 Cal.4th 1041, 1081 (Koontz).) The issue on appeal is simply whether a jury
reasonably could find an attempted killing resulted from preexisting
reflection, rather than an unconsidered and rash impulse. (People
v. Hughes (2002) 27 Cal.4th 287, 342; People
v. Young (2005) 34 Cal.4th 1149, 1183.)
Nevertheless, considering the Anderson guideline factors and the entire record, we conclude
substantial evidence supports the jury’s finding that Bobadilla’s attempted
murder of Jasmine was premeditated and deliberate. To the extent Bobadilla points to contrary
evidence and contrary inferences to support his claim there is insufficient
evidence to support the jury’s finding, he misapplies the substantial evidence
standard of review.
As to the first Anderson
factor, Bobadilla maintains there was no evidence of planning because he did
not lure Jasmine somewhere after arming himself with a weapon, did not lock the
bedroom door as part of a plan of attack, and his letters do not illustrate a
“specific scheme or plan for killing Jasmine.â€
This argument is meritless and ignores the applicable standard of
review: We “must accept [all] logical
inferences that the jury might have drawn from
the . . . evidence,†not Bobadilla’s selective
interpretation of that evidence on appeal.
(See People v. Maury,
First, when Bobadilla woke Jasmine and forced her to her
knees, he was waiting, armed with a bat she had never before seen in the room
the couple had shared for five months. A
defendant’s act of arming himself with a weapon is evidence of planning
activity for purposes of determining whether substantial evidence supports the
jury’s finding of premeditation and deliberation. (Koontz,
The jury could reasonably infer that Bobadilla brought the bat into the
room as part of his plan to attack Jasmine.
Second, the door to the bedroom was locked during the
attack and Jasmine’s parents had to break it open to get in. Both Jasmine and her mother testified that it
was unusual for Jasmine’s bedroom door to be locked. Again, the jury could reasonably conclude
that Bobadilla locked the bedroom door before the attack to keep Jasmine inside
the room, and/or to prevent Jasmine’s family members from getting in to help
her or to stop the attack. “Like first
degree murder, attempted first degree murder requires a finding of
premeditation and deliberation.†(
1217, 1223–1224, fn. omitted.)
“Deliberation†refers to careful weighing of considerations in forming a
course of action. “Premeditation†means
“‘“considered beforehand.â€â€™â€ (
“‘The process of premeditation and deliberation does not require any
extended period of time. “The true test
is not the duration of time as much as it is the extent of the reflection. Thoughts may follow each other with great
rapidity and cold, calculated judgment may be arrived at quickly.â€â€™â€ (Ibid.)
Although perhaps not overwhelming, substantial evidence
supports the jury’s finding that Bobadilla had deliberated and premeditated
before attacking Jasmine. Planning
activity is shown by the evidence that he woke Jasmine twice after their
confrontation about the breakup of their relationship and waited for her to
wake, armed with a bat. The manner of
the assault, swinging a bat multiple times at Jasmine’s face and head, also
indicates calculation. Sufficient
evidence supports a reasonable inference that Bobadilla’s attempt to beat
Jasmine to death with a bat was the result of planning and “preexisting
reflection and weighing of considerations rather than mere unconsidered or rash
impulse.†(People v. Perez, supra, 2
Cal.4th at p. 1125.) The prosecution
presented ample evidence of planning activity.
Regarding the second Anderson
factor, substantial evidence supports a reasonable inference that Bobadilla had
a motive to kill Jasmine. Bobadilla’s
letters demonstrate his motive to kill Jasmine.
Quite simply, he was jealous and undone by the thought that Jasmine was
or might be interested in any man other than him. Just before the attack, Bobadilla told
Jasmine that if he could not be with her, no one could. Bobadilla’s motive was clear: he wanted to kill Jasmine because he was
jealous that she was interested in sex with other men, and so she could never
be with anyone but him.
The evidence supports a finding of motive and planning
activity. (Anderson, supra, 70
Cal.2d at pp. 26–27.) The fact that
Bobadilla brought a bat into the room with him after a jealous confrontation
with Jasmine during which she hurt his feelings and pride, and stood waiting
with that weapon while she woke and sat up, shows planning activity and
motive. As stated in
Cal.App.3d 97, 102, “the law does not require that a first degree murderer have
a ‘rational’ motive for killing. Anger
at the way the victim talked to him [citation] . . . may be sufficient
[citation].†(See also
529 [motive not clear].) “[T]he
incomprehensibility of the motive does not mean that the jury could not
reasonably infer that the defendant entertained and acted on it. [Citation.]â€
(People v. Pensinger (1991) 52
Cal.3d 1210, 1238.)
Bobadilla concedes that his letters contain “some
evidence of motive,†but maintains the evidence is inconsistent because they
also express his love for Jasmine.
Again, Bobadilla simply ignores the rule that all evidentiary conflicts
must be resolved in favor of the judgment.
His argument is rejected.
Finally, Bobadilla claims there is insufficient evidence
of premeditation and deliberation because there was nothing “‘methodical’â€
about his attack on Jasmine. He is
wrong.
Before she went to sleep, Jasmine told Bobadilla she
wanted to end their romantic involvement, and said they would discuss his move
out of her house the next morning.
Bobadilla threatened Jasmine that she better not sleep. She did not argue with or resist Bobadilla,
but ignored him and went to sleep. After
Jasmine was asleep, Bobadilla woke her up painfully by aggressively touching
her vagina, and expressed his jealousy when he believed she was fantasizing
about someone else. Jasmine went back to
sleep. Bobadilla woke Jasmine again,
forced her to her knees, waited for her to sit up and then hit her repeatedly
in the head with the bat he held at the ready.
These events readily demonstrate premeditation and deliberation. In addition, “[t]he utter lack of provocation
by the victim is a strong factor supporting the conclusion that appellant’s
attack was deliberately and reflectively conceived in advance.†(People
v. Lunafelix, supra, 168
Cal.App.3d at p. 102.)
Substantial evidence supports the jury’s conclusion that
the attempted murder was committed with premeditation and deliberation.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.
JOHNSON,
J.
We concur:
ROTHSCHILD, Acting P. J.
CHANEY, J.
name="_ftn1" title="">[1] Further unspecified statutory references
will be to the Penal Code.
