People v. Hundley CA3

BACKGROUND

A detailed recitation of the facts underlying defendant’s conviction is not necessary to resolve his claim on appeal. In short, after meeting the victim, David Barreda, defendant and his codefendant, Curtis Chapman, discussed a plan to kill Barreda but decided to rob him instead. After the three had a confrontation, Chapman shot Barreda in the back of the head. Immediately before Chapman shot Barreda, defendant told him they were going to “take [his] shit,” he acted to distract Barreda while Chapman shot him, and after Barreda was shot, as Chapman removed Barreda’s gun, he told defendant the gun was now theirs. Defendant and his codefendant dragged Barreda from the kitchen to the garage, placed him in the trunk of his car, and drove the car to a nearby location. The next day, Barreda’s body was discovered in the truck of his car. He died from a single gunshot to the back of his head. (People v. Hundley (Jun. 27, 2011, C063497 [nonpub. opn.] at pp. 4-6, 9-10-12, 14 (Hundley).)2, A jury found defendant and codefendant guilty of first degree murder (§ 187, subd. (a)) and found true the special circumstance that the murder was committed while defendants were engaged in the…