Vigil

People v. Vigil

Good Law
120 Cal. Rptr. 3d 643·191 Cal. App. 4th 1474·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 70·77 A.L.R. 6th 739
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 24, 2011No. C061065California5,392 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Butz, J.

*1477 Opinion

This case involves one of the most egregious types of juror misconduct. During deliberations, a juror performed an experiment at his home under conditions not subject to judicial oversight or cross-examination. He later reported the result, which was unfavorable to defendant, to his fellow jurors, who were struggling over a crucial issue in the case. The jury subsequently convicted defendant Kyle Jordan Vigil of shooting at an occupied dwelling (Pen. Code, § 246), 1 with a true finding that the crime was committed to benefit a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1) (hereafter section 186.22(b)(1))), an enhancement that earned him an indeterminate life sentence (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(4)).

Vigil was the driver of the car that was used to commit the charged crimes. The shooter, codefendant Joshua Lawrence Latham, was convicted by the same jury of the same offense and enhancement, as well as an additional count of discharging a firearm in a grossly negligent manner (§ 246.3) for the benefit of a criminal street gang (§ 186.22(b)(1)).

Both defendants appeal. With respect to Vigil, we shall reverse the judgment for prejudicial jury misconduct. With respect to…

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.