People v. Gray CA2/8
B282321B
Cal. Ct. App.Jun 1, 2022Background
- Trevail Gray was convicted by jury (2017) of three counts of attempted murder, related assaults, weapons-possession counts, and gang enhancements; sentenced to 147 years to life after findings of willful, deliberate, and premeditated attempted murders and gang benefit, plus firearm enhancements.
- The shooting (Oct. 25, 2013) was captured on multiple surveillance videos; Gray appears in a blue plaid shirt near the shooter; victims and two jailhouse interviewees (Bailey and Goines) provided identifications and statements, some impeached at trial with recorded pretrial interviews.
- Jury was instructed on both direct aiding-and-abetting liability and the natural-and-probable-consequences (NPC) theory for attempted murder; prosecution argued both theories.
- While Gray’s appeal was pending, the Legislature enacted SB 1437 and SB 775 (narrowing murder/NPC liability and expanding section 1170.95 remedy to attempted murder and permitting direct-appeal challenges), SB 620 (giving courts discretion to strike firearm enhancements), and AB 333 (amending gang statute and adding section 1109 governing bifurcation of gang allegations).
- The Court of Appeal, after reconsideration in light of these statutes and supplemental briefing, reversed the three attempted-murder convictions and their enhancements, reversed all gang findings/enhancements, affirmed other convictions, and remanded for firearm-enhancement and related proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of attempted-murder convictions where jury was instructed under NPC theory after SB 1437/SB 775 | NPC error harmless because jury also received direct aiding-and-abetting instructions and evidence supports intent/PD | NPC instruction invalid under new law; conviction cannot stand if jury may have relied on NPC | Reversed counts 1–3 and associated enhancements; instructional error not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt and retrial on valid theory permitted |
| Gang findings and AB 333 (amendments and §1109 bifurcation) | Some parties conceded statutory amendments apply to nonfinal convictions; §1109 procedural only and not retroactive | §1109 should apply retroactively; admission of gang evidence was structurally prejudicial and warrants reversal of whole judgment | All gang findings/enhancements reversed; AB 333 amendments apply retroactively to nonfinal convictions; §1109 is not retroactive and does not mandate reversal of entire judgment |
| Firearm enhancements after SB 620 (courts’ discretion to strike) | SB 620 ameliorative; applies to nonfinal convictions and permits courts to strike enhancements | Defendant entitled to benefit of discretion; specific enhancements tied to reversed counts must be vacated | 12022.53 enhancements on counts 1–3 reversed (counts reversed); trial court may reexamine/strike 12022.5 enhancements on assault counts on remand |
| Motion for new trial based on post-trial recantations and alleged Brady/Napue violations | Recantations show detective pressured witnesses off-record; nondisclosure and false testimony undermined verdict and required new trial | Prosecution: recordings were complete, evidence not material, other corroboration exists; no Brady or Napue prejudice | Trial court did not abuse discretion; no Brady violation or reasonable probability of different result; perjured-testimony claim harmless beyond a reasonable doubt |
| Alleged instructional and prosecutorial errors (aiding-and-abetting wording, missing conjunction, “partners in crime,” gang/ member wording) | Errors and misstatements deprived Gray of fair trial | Many claims forfeited for lack of objection; remaining instruction errors were technical and nonprejudicial | No reversible error: wording mistakes were surplusage/harmless; objections could have been cured; cumulative-error claim rejected |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Lewis, 11 Cal.5th 952 (describing SB 1437 reforms to murder/NPC liability)
- People v. Chiu, 59 Cal.4th 155 (prosecution may retry after postconviction change in law invalidates conviction theory)
- In re Estrada, 63 Cal.2d 740 (presumption favoring retroactive application of ameliorative criminal statutes)
- People v. Buycks, 5 Cal.5th 857 (analysis of prospective vs. retroactive statutory operation)
- People v. Salazar, 35 Cal.4th 1031 (Brady materiality standard and impeachment-evidence analysis)
- Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18 (harmless-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard for constitutional instructional error)
- Strickler v. Greene, 527 U.S. 263 (Brady framework components)
- Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264 (prosecution’s duty regarding false testimony)
- People v. Dickey, 35 Cal.4th 884 (harmlessness standard for known false testimony)
- People v. Mil, 53 Cal.4th 400 (Chapman standard applied to instructional-element errors)