People v. Valdez CA5

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 9, 2015F066139California11,155 words

Opinion

Opinion

Franson, J.

FACTS

Valdez does not challenge the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the jury’s verdicts in counts 2 and 3 for dissuading a witness under section 136.1, subdivision (b)(1). As such, set forth below are those facts relevant to count 1. Prosecution Evidence At one time, Valdez and Ince were friends. On the day of the shooting, they had known each other for about four or five years. On occasion, Valdez had stayed at the Ince residence in Porterville. Ince’s wife had a medicinal marijuana card and she was growing seven marijuana plants in the days leading up to the shooting. Multiple times before the shooting she noticed Valdez in their backyard near the marijuana plants where he “shouldn’t have been.” Valdez would come around at nighttime and go straight into Ince’s backyard

3 without knocking on the front door. Ince’s wife told Ince about her concerns regarding Valdez’s behavior. Ince also began to have doubts about Valdez after he showed up early one morning at the Ince residence. The Ince’s were concerned that Valdez intended to steal the marijuana, so Ince began to sleep in a tent in the backyard to protect his wife’s garden. On September 20, 2011, Valdez drove to Ince’s…

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.