People v. Prescott CA4/1
D076420
| Cal. Ct. App. | Jul 16, 2021Background
- Defendant Deshaun Prescott, a documented West Coast Crips member, was convicted by a jury of two counts of first degree murder (Derion White and Greggory Davis) and found multiple special allegations true for the White murder (lying in wait, personal firearm use/discharge, gang benefit); firearm and gang enhancements for the Davis count were found not true.
- White was shot execution-style after leaving a San Diego tattoo shop; a witness heard Prescott ask “Where are you from” immediately before the fatal shot. DNA, fingerprints, and surveillance linked Prescott to the scene.
- Davis was shot in Blood-territory weeks later; surveillance and multiple witnesses described two hooded men who fled; Prescott sustained a gunshot wound to the foot and left a blood trail; forensic evidence recovered multiple caliber casings.
- The trial court denied Prescott’s pretrial motion to sever the counts and refused to give a requested self-defense instruction as to the Davis killing; the jury convicted on murder but the theory (direct shooter vs aider/abettor) need not be unanimous.
- On appeal the court affirmed convictions and findings except it agreed with the parties that two one-year prior prison-term enhancements under former §667.5, subd. (b) must be stricken under Senate Bill No. 136; otherwise judgment affirmed and remanded to amend the abstract of judgment.
Issues
| Issue | People’s Argument | Prescott’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Denial of severance of the White count from the Davis-related counts | Joinder proper under §954: same class of offenses (murder/assaultive crimes), overlapping evidence (surveillance, DNA, gang evidence), proximate timing | Joinder prejudiced Prescott: different defenses, risk he would have to testify on one count but not the other (testimony spillover), and weaker/stronger case bootstrap | Denial affirmed: joinder proper, cross-admissible evidence and joinder benefits outweighed any spillover; no abuse of discretion and no gross unfairness shown |
| Refusal to instruct on self-defense for Davis murder | Court: insufficient evidence to support a reasonable juror finding someone else fired first | Prescott: ballistics and multiple weapons fired showed others shot at him first; uncertainty who fired first warranted self-defense instruction | Affirmed: no substantial evidence that another fired first or that Prescott reasonably feared imminent harm; speculation insufficient to warrant instruction |
| Sufficiency of evidence supporting murder conviction for Davis on an aiding-and-abetting theory | People: surveillance, eyewitnesses (one saw gun), concurrent flight, blood trail, and forensic evidence support either direct perpetration or aiding/abetting; unanimity as to theory not required | Prescott: no evidence he facilitated the shooting or shared intent; jury’s rejection of firearm enhancements shows doubt he fired | Affirmed: substantial evidence permitted a rational juror to find Prescott either fired or aided/abetted; jury need not unanimously agree on theory |
| Sufficiency of evidence that White murder was gang-related under §186.22(b)(1) | People: Prescott’s documented WCC membership, witness challenge (“Where are you from”), expert testimony that retaliatory, execution-style killing would benefit/promote the gang | Prescott: expert’s retaliation opinion was speculative and unsupported; gangs remained allies so no gang nexus | Affirmed: expert’s non-conclusory opinion plus the challenge statement and temporal link to prior killing supported the gang enhancement; jury had instruction to disregard strained testimony and was presumed to follow it |
| Application of Senate Bill No. 136 to §667.5, subd. (b) prior-prison-term enhancements | People (conceded): SB 136 limits §667.5(b) enhancements to sexually violent offenses and applies retroactively to nonfinal judgments | Prescott: requested relief | Granted: two one-year §667.5(b) enhancements stricken; remand limited to amending abstract of judgment (no resentencing required) |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Scott, 61 Cal.4th 363 (joinder and severance standards)
- People v. Osband, 13 Cal.4th 622 (defendant’s burden to show clear potential of prejudice to sever)
- People v. Landry, 2 Cal.5th 52 (test for severance when defendant wishes to testify on some counts but not others)
- People v. Majors, 18 Cal.4th 385 (jury need not unanimously agree on theory of liability)
- People v. Albillar, 51 Cal.4th 47 (gang enhancement requires specific intent; expert testimony can support enhancement)
- People v. Breverman, 19 Cal.4th 142 (trial court’s duty to instruct on defenses)
- People v. Blair, 36 Cal.4th 686 (standard for substantial evidence supporting an instruction)
- In re Estrada, 63 Cal.2d 740 (retroactivity of ameliorative statutory changes)