SUPREME COURT COPY IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ) Supreme Ct. No. ) S070536 Plaintiff and Respondent, ) ) Los Angeles vs. ) County No. , J BAI08995 LUIS MACIEL, ) ) Ddendant and Appellant. ) SuPREME ~OURT ) _______________. _______________ J FILED FEB 2 - 2007 APPELLANT'S OPENJ~"G BRIEF Frederiek It: 9hlrich Clerk ;f!II' .. • _ "'u . .._."g~, ; APPEAL FJI..O~H A JUDGlVlENT OF DEATH FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS A.N.GEI~ES COUNTY THE I:lONORAR'-J~ CHARLES HORAi~, JUDGE PRESID!N~~ l\iELISSA HILL S~ate Bar No. 71218 PO Box 2758 Corrales, New Mexico 87048 Phone: (SUS) 898-2977 Fax: (505) 898-5085 Email: !J!hcoXrals@~andia.net Attorney for Appellant Luis Maciel IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ) Supreme Ct. No. ) S070536 Plaintiff and Respondent, ) ) Los Angeles vs. ) County No. ) BAI08995 LUIS MACIEL, ) ) Defendant and Appellant. ) ) ) APPELLANT'S OPENING BRIEF APPEAL FROM A JUDGMENT OF DEATH FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY THE HONORABLE CHARLES HORAN, JUDGE PRESIDING MELISSA HILL State Bar No. 71218 PO Box 2758 Corrales, New Mexico 87048 Phone: (505) 898-2977 Fax: (505) 898-5085 Email: [email protected] Attorney for Appellant Luis Maciel TOPICAL INDEX TABLE OF AUTHORITIES .................................................................... xx APPELLANT'S OPENING BRIEF ............................................................ 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1 STATEMENT OF THE CASE .................................................................... 3 STATEMENT OF APPEALABILITY ........................................................ 6 STATEMENT OF FACTS - PEOPLE'S CASE-IN-CHIEF ....................... 7 Regarding Identities and Ages of Victims At Death ........................ 7 Events On Maxson Road Prior to the Murders ................................. 7 The Scene of the Crime .................................................................... 8 The Cause of Death .......................................................................... 8 Testimony of Victor Jiminez ............................................................ 8 Testimony of Witness #16 ................................................................ 9 Testimony of Witness #l3 and Elizabeth Torres ............................ 10 The Firearms Identification Evidence ............................................. 11 Gang Expert Testimony .................................................................. 11 Videotape Evidence ........................................................................ 15 The Testimony of Witness #15 ....................................................... 20 The Testimony of Witness #14 ....................................................... 22 The Testimony ofDA John Monaghan .......................................... 23 Testimony of Investigator Stephen Davis ....................................... 24 1 Testimony of Investigator Stephen Davis ....................................... 24 Extrajudicial Statements of Anthony Torres ................................... 25 Tape-recorded Statement of Luis Maciel ........................................ 25 Telephone and Pager Record Evidence .......................................... 27 Appellant's Pager Records .................................................. 27 From the Gomez Residence ................................................. 27 From the Torres Residence .................................................. 27 From the Palma Residence .................................................. 27 STATEMENT OF FACTS - THE GUILT-PHASE DEFENSE ................ 27 The Baptismal Party ........................................................................ 27 Testimony of Witness #12 .............................................................. 30 STATEMENT OF FACTS - The Prosecution's Penalty Phase Evidence. 31 The September 3, 1993, beating of Nathanial Lane ....................... 31 The August 30, 1994, Stabbing of Witness #17 ............................. 32 Incidents in County Jail .................................................................. 33 STATEMENT OF FACTS - Penalty Phase Defense Evidence ................. 34 The Testimony of Family Members and Friends ............................ 34 Gang Violence Prevention Activities ............................................. 34 Rebuttal to Aggravation .................................................................. 35 PART I - GUILT PHASE ARGUMENTS I. MACIEL'S CONVICTIONS OF FIVE FIRST DEGREE MURDERS, AND THE JURY'S FINDING IN SUPPORT OF THE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE OF MULTIPLE MURDER THAT MACIEL INTENDED TO CAUSE THE DEATH OF FOUR OF FIVE VICTIMS, 11 ARE NOT SUPPORTED BY CONSTITUTIONALLY SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE ................................................................................................ 37 A. Applicable law .......................................................................... 37 1. Standard of Review ........................................................ 37 2. The prosecution's theory of the case .............................. 38 B. The evidence was incredible, unreasonable and unreliable, and thus constitutionally insufficient, to prove that Maciel either aided or abetted, or participated in a conspiracy to murder Anthony Moreno and Gustavo Aguirre .............................. 39 1. Witness #15 .................................................................... 40 2. Witness #14 .................................................................... 41 C. The record does not support the jury's finding that the murders of Gustavo Aguirre, Maria Moreno and the two children were the natural, probable, and foreseeable consequence of a Mexican Mafia contract to kill Anthony Moreno ............................................................................. 47 D. The evidence does not support the jury's implied finding that Maciel conspired, or aided and abetted Sangra gang members with the specific intent to kill Aguirre, or Maria and Laura Moreno ........................................................................... 49 E. The trial court erred by denying appellant's Section 1118.1 motion .................................................................... 51 F. The trial court erred by denying the motion to dismiss the special circumstance finding ..................................................... 51 G. If any murder count is reversed, or if this Court finds that insufficient evidence supports the jury's findings of four intentional murders, the death penalty must be reversed and the cause remanded to allow reconsideration of the death penalty ....... 52 111 II. THE TRIAL COURT ERRONEOUSLY DENIED APPELLANT'S MOTION TO DISCHARGE RETAINED COUNSEL AND HAVE COUNSEL APPOINTED .......................................................................... 57 A. Introduction ............................................................................... 57 B. Procedural background .............................................................. 58 C. Arguments ................................................................................. 60 1. The trial court applied the wrong legal standard in ruling on appellant's motion to discharge retained counsel ........... 60 2. Application of the wrong standard was not "invited." ... 61 3. The court did not find that discharge would cause "significant prejudice to appellant, or "disruption of the orderly processes of justice." ......................................... 62 4. The trial court's finding that the motion was "not the most timely" lacks support in the record ....................... 63 5. The trial court erred by ignoring glaring deficiencies in counsel's performance and by failing to genuinely examine most of Maciel's claims ........................................ 67 a. Denial of discovery violated due process ............ 67 b. The exclusion of appellant's "investigator," Mr. Guillen, deprived appellant of a fair hearing ..... 69 6. The trial court's finding that there had been no irremediable breakdown of the attorney-client relationship is unsupported ..................................................................... 73 7. The court's failed to conduct an adequate hearing to determine whether there was any merit to appellant's complaints about counsel ..................................................... 74 a. The court failed to conduct an adequate inquiry into most of appellant's complaints about counsel's IV lack of guilt phase investigation ............................... 74 (1) The court failed to adequately inquire after counsel admitted he had not investigated evidence with which to impeach witness #15 74 (2) The court failed to adequately inquire when counsel admitted he had not investigated evidence with which to impeach witness #14 .................................................... 76 (3) The court failed to adequately inquire into the reasons for counsel's failure to file a Pitchess motion seeking citizen complaints of prior acts of dishonesty by investigating officers ........................................................... 78 (4) The court did not adequately inquire into the reasons why trial counsel was refusing to file a motion to dismiss the indictment based on the prosecutor's failure to present potentially exculpatory evidence to the grand jury............................................. 80 (5) The trial court failed to adequately