27 Cal. App. 5th 797
Cal. Ct. App. 5th2018Background
- In 2004 Cesar Loza (a member of Southside Raza) handed a handgun during a gang confrontation; another gang member (Andrade) fired the gun and killed Edward Rendon.
- Loza, Andrade, Loza's brother Luis, and Rizo were tried together in adult court; the jury convicted Loza of first degree premeditated murder, a substantive gang offense, and found gang and firearm enhancements true.
- The jury was instructed on two aider-and-abettor theories: direct (intentional) aiding and abetting, and the natural-and-probable-consequences (nontarget) doctrine.
- In 2014 the California Supreme Court decided People v. Chiu, holding the natural-and-probable-consequences doctrine cannot support a first degree (premeditated) murder conviction because premeditation is a subjective personal state.
- On habeas review, the court found the jury instructions here again allowed conviction under the now-invalid Chiu theory and that the prosecution’s closing argument urged the natural-and-probable-consequences theory; the court could not conclude beyond a reasonable doubt the jury relied solely on the valid direct-aid theory.
- The court vacated Loza’s first degree murder conviction, ordered the gang sentence stayed under Penal Code § 654, and remanded for a Franklin hearing to allow the record for future youth offender parole review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether jury instructions permitted a conviction of first degree murder under the (now-invalid) natural-and-probable-consequences theory | Loza: instructions allowed conviction under Chiu-barred theory, requiring reversal | AG: first-degree instruction referred to defendant’s mental state, not perpetrator’s, so jury had to find Loza personally premeditated | Court: Instruction and introductory language allowed "defendant" to mean any defendant (including the shooter); Chiu error present — conviction vacated |
| Whether Chiu instructional error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt | Loza: error not harmless; prosecutor argued natural-and-probable-consequences in closing | AG: any error was nonprejudicial; unlikely jury relied on invalid theory | Court: Not harmless. Prosecutor’s argument supported nontarget theory; reversal required unless harmless beyond reasonable doubt, which AG did not prove |
| Whether the concurrent sentence for the substantive gang offense must be stayed under § 654 | Loza: sentence should be stayed because gang offense arose from same conduct as murder | AG: conceded error | Court: Agreed; two-year gang term stayed under § 654 |
| Whether Loza is entitled to a Franklin hearing to put youth-related evidence on the record for future parole review | Loza: sentencing occurred before Franklin; he must get chance to record youth-related evidence | AG: opposed | Court: Remand for Franklin hearing so parties can present evidence for future youth offender parole consideration |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Chiu, 59 Cal.4th 155 (invalidating use of natural-and-probable-consequences doctrine to support first degree premeditated murder)
- People v. Franklin, 63 Cal.4th 261 (remand for record development to support youth offender parole hearings)
- In re Martinez, 3 Cal.5th 1216 (Chiu error on habeas requires reversal unless harmless beyond a reasonable doubt)
- Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18 (harmless-error standard: prosecution must prove error did not contribute to verdict beyond a reasonable doubt)