P.

P. v. Ramirez CA1/4

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 28, 2013A133923California6,909 words

Opinion

Opinion

I.

INTRODUCTION

Appellant was convicted of shooting and killing a marijuana dealer during an aborted attempt to rob the victim of drugs and cash. The principal contested issue at trial was whether appellant was the shooter. Circumstantial and eyewitness evidence placed appellant at the scene, but the testimony of two accomplices was the only evidence that appellant was the one who fired the fatal shot. One of the accomplices testified under a plea agreement, and the other was granted use immunity. Appellant contends: (1) the trial court erred in permitting the prosecution to introduce statements appellant made during telephone calls from jail as evidence of consciousness of guilt; (2) the prosecution improperly vouched for the truthfulness of the accomplice witnesses; (3) the trial court erred in admitting evidence that appellant had possessed guns and robbery proceeds unrelated to the murder of the marijuana dealer; and (4) the cumulative effect of these errors deprived appellant of due process and a fair trial. We reject these contentions, and affirm.

II.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A. The Shooting Chad Clarke lived in a four-unit apartment building in Emeryville…

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.