People v. Jackio
236 Cal. App. 4th 445
| Cal. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- Early-morning home invasion: two men (the jury found defendant Lawrence Jackio and Rashid Deary-Smith) entered a garage where occupants Martez Laster and Antonia Branch were present; both victims were shot/assaulted and one assailant was pistol-whipped.
- Physical evidence tied Jackio to the scene: trail of blood matching his DNA, gunshot residue on his hands/pants, a nine‑millimeter handgun and expended 9mm casings at the scene, and his wallet/blood found in a car he drove away in.
- Jackio testified he was present but claimed he was shot while waiting and not one of the assailants.
- Jury convictions: first‑degree burglary; two counts assault with a firearm; attempted murder; two counts attempted first‑degree robbery; felon in possession of a firearm; multiple firearm, discharge, and great‑bodily‑injury enhancements.
- Sentence: determinate term of 19 years 4 months plus a consecutive indeterminate term of 50 years to life.
- On appeal Jackio raised multiple issues; the published portion addresses whether his Faretta waiver was valid given the court’s advisement that he faced “life in prison.” The court affirmed judgment but ordered correction of a clerical error in the abstract of judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (People) | Defendant's Argument (Jackio) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of Faretta waiver re: penalty advisement | Advisement that defendant faced life in prison adequately informed him of the maximum penalty and satisfied Sixth Amendment requirements | Court had to give a breakdown of the full range of possible punishments for all charged crimes and enhancements; a single statement "life" was ambiguous | Court held advisement of the maximum possible punishment ("life in prison") is sufficient; waiver was knowing and voluntary |
| Sufficiency of evidence for firearm‑discharge and great bodily injury enhancements tied to Branch’s attempted robbery | Evidence of a single continuous transaction (Jackio shot Laster causing great bodily injury) supports application of discharge/gbi enhancements to other counts | Enhancements insufficient as there was no direct proof Jackio shot Branch or inflicted her injury | Held enhancements were supported because the shootings were part of one continuous transaction and any person’s injury may support enhancements as to related counts |
| Sufficiency of assault and attempted robbery of Branch | Branch testified men pointed guns and one pistol‑whipped her; circumstantial evidence tied Jackio to the attack and intent to rob | Lack of direct ID of Jackio by Branch and DNA on gun near Deary‑Smith shows insufficient proof Jackio assaulted Branch or intended robbery | Held evidence (pointing a gun, pistol‑whip, zip ties, intent to enter residence to steal) was sufficient to support assault and attempted robbery convictions |
| Duty to instruct on third‑party culpability sua sponte | Standard instructions on presumption of innocence and reasonable doubt suffice; no sua sponte duty | Where defendant’s defense points to another perpetrator court must instruct on third‑party culpability without request | Held no sua sponte duty to give third‑party culpability instruction when general reasonable‑doubt/presumption instructions were given |
Key Cases Cited
- Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (U.S. 1975) (recognizing right to self‑representation and need to warn of dangers)
- Iowa v. Tovar, 541 U.S. 77 (U.S. 2004) (for guilty pleas, court must inform of nature of charges, right to counsel, and range of allowable punishments)
- People v. Koontz, 27 Cal.4th 1041 (Cal. 2002) (Faretta standards and review of colloquy adequacy)
- People v. Burgener, 46 Cal.4th 231 (Cal. 2009) (no specific script required; record must show defendant understood risks of self‑representation)
- United States v. Erskine, 355 F.3d 1161 (9th Cir. 2004) (distinguishable: court’s erroneous low‑penalty advisement rendered waiver invalid)
- People v. Frausto, 180 Cal.App.4th 890 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009) (a single continuous transaction can support firearm/gbi enhancements across multiple counts)
- People v. Bland, 28 Cal.4th 313 (Cal. 2002) (discussing sufficiency where shooter identity between co‑defendants is unclear)