B336561
Cal. Ct. App.Aug 25, 2025Background
- Defendant Ashley Melissa Butts conspired with a friend, Israel “Stoney” Rios, to assault her landlord, Larry, after disputes related to her tenancy, dogs, and missing bicycles.
- The assault involved Rios and another perpetrator entering Larry’s home at night, striking him with a blunt object, and firing a gun, causing Larry a concussion, laceration, and other injuries.
- Text messages and phone records tied Butts to the arrangement of the attack, including coordinating with Rios, arranging an Uber, and facilitating access to the home.
- Butts was originally charged with assault, conspiracy, and burglary; after a severance, she was tried separately, resulting in a mistrial, and later retried with new counsel.
- At retrial, Butts was convicted by a jury of felony assault and conspiracy; the burglary count had been dismissed.
- She appealed, raising several evidentiary, instructional, and diversion-related challenges to her conviction and sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of warrantless cell phone evidence | Search was consensual and/or later covered by a valid warrant | Butts did not consent; improper warrantless search; should be suppressed | Consent found; evidence lawfully admitted; no error |
| Exclusion of Rios's Uber ride statements | Statements were hearsay, untrustworthy, confusing | Statements showed alternative motives for Rios; state of mind exception | Properly excluded; lacked trustworthiness, minimal probative value |
| Exclusion of post-assault altercation with Larry's family | Incident not relevant and would confuse the jury | Relevant to bias; explained texts and demeanor | Properly excluded; minimal probative value, risk of confusion |
| Admission of law school expulsion letter | Impeachment of Butts’s credibility and evidence of character | Letter is hearsay; overly prejudicial; too remote | Admission for truth was error, but harmless given overwhelming evidence |
| Failure to instruct on simple assault as lesser included | N/A | Force used may have warranted lesser assault instruction | No instruction required; evidence supported great bodily injury |
| Denial of renewed mental health diversion motion after amendment | N/A | Amendments created favorable presumption; denial erroneous | Waived by not raising after statutory amendment and before trial |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Lenart, 32 Cal.4th 1107 (Cal. 2004) (review of motions to suppress evidence governed by federal standards)
- Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 373 (2014) (cell phone searches generally require warrants unless exception applies)
- Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218 (1973) (consent is a recognized exception to the warrant requirement)
- People v. Wheeler, 4 Cal.4th 284 (Cal. 1992) (misdemeanor convictions generally inadmissible hearsay for impeachment)
- People v. Snow, 30 Cal.4th 43 (Cal. 2003) (application of evidentiary rules generally does not violate fair trial rights)
- People v. McDaniel, 159 Cal.App.4th 736 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008) (assault by means of force likely to cause great bodily injury)
- People v. Saunders, 5 Cal.4th 580 (Cal. 1993) (rights may be forfeited by failure to assert them in time)