People v. Jones
220 Cal. Rptr. 3d 618
| Cal. | 2017Background
- In December 1996, four people were shot in Long Beach; two (Lopez, Villa) died; two survived (Munguia, Hernandez). Defendant Kiongozi Jones was charged with two murders, attempted murder, assault with a firearm, and shooting at an inhabited dwelling; the jury found him guilty and returned a death sentence after finding the multiple-murder special circumstance true.
- Evidence linked the shootings to gang conflict (Rolling 20s Crips v. Eastside Longos). Prosecution presented eyewitnesses who identified Jones as the shooter, gang expert testimony, shell casings tying the scenes to one gun, and testimony placing Jones and co-defendant Sherman together near the shootings.
- Defense emphasized identification issues, impeached witnesses about inconsistent statements and motive to lie, and presented mitigating evidence about Jones’s difficult upbringing and role as a father; defense unsuccessfully sought to introduce lay/gang-opinion evidence that Jones was no longer active in the gang.
- A tape-recorded jail phone call between Jones and his brother was admitted; prosecution argued it bore on consciousness of guilt (disposing weapons, witness intimidation, threat to a district attorney); defense witnesses offered alternative explanations.
- At penalty phase, prosecution introduced six incidents of alleged unadjudicated violent conduct as aggravating evidence; the jury returned a death verdict. Jones challenged multiple trial rulings on evidentiary, confrontation, jury selection, and constitutional sentencing grounds on automatic appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (People) | Defendant's Argument (Jones) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Exclusion of prosecutor Connolly’s out-of-court statement (hearsay) about case weakness | No error; trial limited scope, defense did elicit that Connolly asked for witnesses and Granillo came forward, and any error was harmless | Excluding Connolly’s exact words prevented showing motive to fabricate by Granillo and violated confrontation/presentation rights | Any restriction was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt; no reversible error |
| 2. Exclusion of lay witness Robert Robinson’s testimony that Jones was no longer active in the gang | Admission would be cumulative/unsupported; Robinson not qualified as expert and relied on hearsay | Robinson’s opinion relevant to rebut gang evidence and show diminished motive; should have been admitted (or as expert/character evidence) | Trial court properly excluded under Evidence Code; admitting as expert not preserved; no constitutional violation |
| 3. Admission of tape-recorded jail phone call (partly unintelligible) | Tape was relevant to consciousness of guilt (disposing weapons/witness intimidation/DA threat); transcript only used as listening aid | Tape was speculative, confusing, prejudicial, and unintelligible; transcript unfairly emphasized words | Court did not abuse discretion: recording and transcript sufficiently intelligible and probative; admissible and not fundamentally unfair |
| 4. Excusal for cause of prospective juror 3389 (death-qualification) | Juror showed bias toward life without parole and would not fairly consider both penalties; excusal proper | Juror said he could consider death in some circumstances; excusal improper and requires reversal of penalty verdict | Substantial evidence supported for-cause excusal under Wainwright/Witt; no reversal required |
Key Cases Cited
- Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18 (U.S. 1967) (harmless error standard for federal constitutional errors)
- Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673 (U.S. 1986) (confrontation clause and harmless-error review of limits on cross-examination)
- Wainwright v. Witt, 469 U.S. 412 (U.S. 1985) (standard for excusing jurors for cause in capital cases)
- Uttecht v. Brown, 551 U.S. 1 (U.S. 2007) (deference to trial court on juror equivocation during death qualification)
- People v. Sanchez, 63 Cal.4th 665 (Cal. 2016) (limits on experts testifying to case-specific out-of-court statements)
- People v. Watson, 46 Cal.2d 818 (Cal. 1956) (state harmless-error standard)
- People v. Taylor, 48 Cal.4th 574 (Cal. 2010) (use of unadjudicated crimes at penalty phase upheld)
- People v. Jones, 54 Cal.4th 1 (Cal. 2012) (death-qualification and assessment of juror equivocality)