In Re Price

Good Law
121 Cal. Rptr. 3d 572·2011 Cal. LEXIS 1388·51 Cal. 4th 547·247 P.3d 929
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 14, 2011S069685California6,063 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kennard, J.

A jury convicted petitioner Curtis F. Price of the first degree murders (Pen. Code, § 187) of Elizabeth Ann Hickey and Richard Barnes. As to the murder of Hickey, the jury made special circumstance findings of multiple murder (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(3)) and burglary murder (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(G)), and it fixed the penalty at death. The trial court denied the automatic motion to modify penalty (§ 190.4, subd. (e)) and sentenced petitioner to death. On petitioner’s automatic appeal, this court unanimously affirmed the judgment. (People v. Price (1991) 1 Cal.4th 324 [ 3 Cal.Rptr.2d 106 , 821 P.2d 610 ].)

In a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, petitioner seeks relief from the judgment. He has alleged, among other things, that during the capital trial “the prosecutor in this case improperly tampered with a sitting juror by sending her alcoholic drinks and money, telling her to return a guilty verdict.” We issued an order to show cause on this claim only. By limiting the order to show cause to this single claim, we made an implicit determination that petitioner failed to state a prima facie case as to the other claims alleged in the petition. (See In re Sassounian (1995) 9…

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.