Pantoja

People v. Pantoja

Good Law
122 Cal. App. 4th 1·18 Cal. Rptr. 3d 492
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 6, 2004A101223California6,329 words

Opinion

Opinion

Pollak, J.

Defendant Jorge Antonio Pantoja appeals from his conviction on one count of first degree murder and one count of child endangerment after he killed his girlfriend, Maria Montero, in the presence of their daughter. In proving that defendant committed premeditated murder, the prosecution relied in large part on a declaration by Montero included in an application for a restraining order that was filed several days before she was killed. In the declaration, Montero stated that defendant had threatened to kill her. Defendant contends that the declaration was not admissible under Evidence Code section 1370 and that its receipt in evidence violated his Sixth Amendment right of confrontation under the United States Constitution. We agree that the contents of the declaration were not admissible under section 1370, and we therefore do not reach the constitutional question. Because the erroneous admission of this evidence likely influenced defendant’s conviction of premeditated murder, rather than a lesser degree of homicide, we reverse his conviction.

Background

There was substantial evidence at trial of the following facts.

On February 23, 1999, defendant went to the emergency…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.