P. v. Contreras
Juan Contreras appeals from a judgment convicting him of second degree murder. He asserts the trial court erred in (1) admitting hearsay evidence and (2) denying a new trial motion based on juror misconduct. We find no reversible error and affirm the judgment.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On the night of March 19, 2006, Ricardo Orozco and Salvador Ortiz were shot to death in the restroom of a restaurant. Defendant was charged with the murder of both men. At trial, defendant testified on his own behalf, admitting the shootings but claiming they were in self-defense. The jury convicted him of second degree murder of Orozco, and acquitted him of all charges concerning Ortiz.
On the night of the shooting, defendant was at the restaurant with a friend known as "La Momia." Silvia Mendez, a waitress at the restaurant, noticed that defendant appeared drunk. Defendant was acting "a little bit aggressive." Mendez saw defendant hitting his beer bottle against a table where another man was sitting. The other man at the table did not "pay him any mind" and did not "challenge him back in any way." Defendant then started arguing with another person in an aggressive fashion. Mendez could not hear that entire conversation, but at the end of the conversation she heard defendant say something about " 'blows, hits.' " Mendez testified that it appeared as if defendant was trying to "pick a fight" with this second man. This second person likewise did not pay any attention and did not challenge defendant in any way. Mendez did not think defendant was going to actually fight because he was acting normal, "like any other drunk" and a lot of the men at the restaurant were drunk. However, the shooting occurred less than one hour later.
Comments on P. v. Contreras