In re Crew

Good Law
127 Cal. Rptr. 3d 285·2011 Cal. LEXIS 6840·2011 D.A.R. 10·52 Cal. 4th 126·254 P.3d 320
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJuly 11, 2011S107856California9,993 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kennard, J.

A jury convicted petitioner Mark Christopher Crew of one count of murder (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a)) and one count of grand theft (§§ 484, 487). It found true a special circumstance allegation that the murder was for financial gain. (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(1).) The jury fixed the penalty for the murder at death. On petitioner’s automatic appeal (Cal. Const., art. VI, § 11; Pen. Code, § 1239), this court affirmed the judgment (People v. Crew (2003) 31 Cal.4th 822 [ 3 Cal.Rptr.3d 733 , 74 P.3d 820 ]).

Petitioner filed a timely petition for a writ of habeas corpus seeking relief from the judgment. He alleged, among other things, ineffective representation by his trial counsel at the penalty phase of his capital trial for failing to adequately investigate and present mitigating evidence. We issued an order to show cause limited to this claim.

After the filing of the Attorney General’s return and petitioner’s reply to it, we determined that disputed questions of fact required an evidentiary hearing. On September 13, 2006, we appointed as referee the Honorable Andrea Y. Bryan, a superior court judge in Santa Clara County, and directed her to take evidence and make findings of…

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.