In re Demirdjian on Habeas Corpus CA2/4

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 19, 2024B331468California4,859 words

Opinion

Opinion

Zukin, J.

INTRODUCTION

In 2001, a jury found Michael Hrayr Demirdjian guilty of two counts of first degree murder. The jury found true the multiple murder and torture- murder special circumstance allegations. The jury also found the allegation that Demirdjian was 14 years of age or older when he personally killed the victims and that a special circumstance was found to be true. In 2014, our Supreme Court held in People v. Chiu (2014) 59 Cal.4th 155 (Chiu) that a natural and probable consequences theory of liability cannot serve as a basis for a first degree murder conviction. In 2023, Demirdjian filed a habeas corpus petition seeking relief under Chiu, contending the jury was improperly instructed that he could be convicted of first degree murder under the natural and probable consequences doctrine. In response, the Attorney General argues the petition is procedurally barred as untimely and further disputes Chiu error. In any event, he asserts any error is harmless because the jury convicted Demirdjian as the actual killer based on its finding that he personally killed the victims as well as the overwhelming evidence of premeditated murder. As a preliminary matter, we reject the Attorney…

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.