People v. Abel, 138 Cal. Rptr. 3d 547

Armando Miller, owner of Alameda Market, was murdered in a bank parking lot after withdrawing $20,000; defendant Abel was linked by eyewitness identifications and a prior relationship with co-conspirators.
Prosecution presented eyewitness identifications from Bettina Redondo and Colleen Heuvelman, plus Ripple’s testimony about Abel’s involvement and a murder weapon allegedly given to Ripple.
Defendant testified to extensive robberies and alibis, denying the bank parking lot murder or knowledge of the murder weapon.
The penalty phase included extensive evidence of Abel’s prior robberies and criminal history; defense offered no evidence.
Pretrial delay (from 1993 anonymous tip to charges in 1995) was challenged as investigative delay but rejected for lack of proven prejudice.
Questions at trial included whether the murder was charged as felony murder and whether the jury could convict on an uncharged theory, with the court holding notice was adequate.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Precharging delay and due process prejudice	Nelson standard shows prejudice from precharging delay; delay undermines defense	Delay caused memory loss and witness unavailability; prejudice shown	No due process violation; defendant failed show prejudice
Denial of pretrial lineup	Lineup would aid identification fairness; witnesses identified Abel from photos	Lineup should have been held earlier; delay harmed defense	No due process error; denial was proper given timing and known issues
Judicial misconduct and its impact on fairness	Court’s quips/remarks biased jury against defense	Court allied with prosecution and interfered with defense	No reversible error; overall trial fairness preserved; improper remarks did not affect outcome
Admission of Ripple testimony about threats and gang affiliation	Evidence relevant to credibility and defense context; admissible	Gang testimony and threats were improper prejudice	Admissible; any prejudice cured by curative admonitions; no reversal
Penalty phase modification and consideration of victim impact	Court properly weighed aggravating vs mitigating factors; evidence supports death verdict	Court mis-stated standard and improperly weighed factors	No reversible error; modification ruling within statutory framework

People v. Nelson, 43 Cal.4th 1242 (Cal. 2008) (speedy-trial rights do not attach until arrest or charging; prejudice analysis governs delay claims)
People v. Archerd, 3 Cal.3d 615 (Cal. 1970) (due process limits on precharging delay; prejudice required for relief)
Evans v. Superior Court, 11 Cal.3d 617 (Cal. 1974) (pretrial lineup when eyewitness identifications present; timely request required)
People v. Baines, 30 Cal.3d 143 (Cal. 1981) (timeliness and good cause govern pretrial lineup denial)
People v. Sturm, 37 Cal.4th 1218 (Cal. 2006) (judicial conduct standards and prejudice analysis in trial)
People v. Hughes, 27 Cal.4th 287 (Cal. 2002) (notice and theory of murder theories; sufficiency of notice for felony murder)
People v. Moore, 51 Cal.4th 386 (Cal. 2011) (capital punishment framework; Apprendi lineage in California context)