People v. Robbins
19 Cal. App. 5th 660
| Cal. Ct. App. 5th | 2018Background
- On August 11, 2013 Eric David Robbins, after an altercation at an AM/PM in Victorville with security guard Clarence Jones, left, retrieved rifles from his truck, returned, and fatally shot cashier Daniel Olivera while believing Olivera was Jones. Robbins later admitted he intended to kill Jones.
- A jury convicted Robbins of first degree murder (with a lying-in-wait special circumstance) and attempted murder; found true personal firearm-discharge enhancements (§ 12022.53(d)); trial court sentenced LWOP plus consecutive 25-to-life on the firearm enhancement and concurrent terms for attempted murder including a 25-to-life enhancement.
- Robbins raised multiple appellate claims including insufficiency of evidence for attempted murder, applicability of transferred intent to the lying-in-wait special circumstance, failure to instruct on heat-of-passion voluntary manslaughter (and attempted manslaughter), ineffective assistance for not requesting provocation-degree instruction, prosecutorial elicitation of evidence about racist stickers (violating an in limine ruling), cumulative error, sentencing error on attempted murder term, and whether the court must be allowed to strike firearm enhancements under newly effective law.
- The Court held there was substantial evidence of attempted murder of Jones under transferred-intent and mistake-of-fact principles: Robbins intended to kill Jones, believed he was shooting Jones, and therefore committed an ineffectual act toward killing Jones even though Olivera died.
- The Court held transferred intent applies to the lying-in-wait special circumstance because lying-in-wait requires the same deliberate/premeditated intent that is transferable; therefore the special-circumstance finding stands.
- The Court rejected requests to instruct on heat-of-passion manslaughter (and attempted manslaughter) and ineffective-assistance claim relating to provocation instructions, finding provocation was not sufficient under an objective standard and counsel reasonably pursued an intoxication theory to negate premeditation.
- The Court found no prosecutorial misconduct in elicitation of witness references to stickers (swastika/German helmet) because answers were nonresponsive/unanticipated; it also reversed and remanded sentencing aspects: (1) attempted murder term must be life with parole (statutory § 664(a)), and (2) the firearm enhancements must be vacated and the trial court given the opportunity to exercise discretion under newly effective § 12022.53(h). In all other respects, judgment affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (People) | Defendant's Argument (Robbins) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for attempted murder of Jones | Evidence shows Robbins intended to kill Jones and fired at whom he believed was Jones | Single bullet killed Olivera so only one homicide victim; attempted murder of Jones not supported | Substantial evidence supports attempted murder of Jones via transferred intent/mistake-of-fact — conviction upheld |
| Applicability of transferred intent to lying-in-wait special circumstance | Transferred intent applies to deliberate/premeditated intent; lying-in-wait requires same mental state | Transferred intent inapplicable because statute requires "intentionally killed the victim" | Transferred intent applies; lying-in-wait special circumstance upheld |
| Heat-of-passion manslaughter (and attempted manslaughter) instructions | N/A (defense sought instruction) | Provocation by Jones' refusal and contact justified a heat-of-passion instruction | Trial court did not err — provocation insufficient for an ordinary person; no instruction required |
| Ineffective assistance re: provocation-degree instruction | N/A | Counsel should have requested instruction on how provocation affects degree of murder | No ineffective assistance — counsel reasonably pursued intoxication theory and strategic choice was reasonable |
| Prosecutorial elicitation of racist-sticker testimony | N/A | Prosecutor elicited inadmissible evidence of white-supremacist stickers contrary to in limine order | No prosecutorial misconduct — testimony was nonresponsive/unanticipated; court admonished jury |
| Cumulative error | N/A | Combined errors require reversal | No cumulative error — no prejudicial errors found |
| Attempted-murder sentence (term) | Sentencing as imposed was proper | Section 664(a) mandates life with parole for willful, premeditated attempted murder | Remanded: attempted-murder term reversed and must be life with parole |
| Firearm enhancements discretion under § 12022.53(h) | N/A | Trial court must be allowed to consider striking enhancements retroactively | Remanded: firearm enhancement terms vacated and trial court must exercise discretion under § 12022.53(h) |
Key Cases Cited
- Bland v. Maryland, 28 Cal.4th 313 (explanation of transferred intent and mens rea elasticity)
- Scott v. California, 14 Cal.4th 544 (transferred intent does not preclude attempted murder charge for intended victim)
- Sandoval v. California, 62 Cal.4th 394 (lying-in-wait requires substantial watching and waiting; akin to premeditation)
- Beardslee v. California, 53 Cal.3d 68 (mistake of fact governed by how defendant perceived facts)
- Sears v. California, 2 Cal.3d 180 (deliberate and premeditated intent can transfer when wrong victim killed)
- Hajek & Vo v. California, 58 Cal.4th 1144 (noting lack of case law on transferred intent and lying-in-wait)
- Tully v. California, 54 Cal.4th 952 (prosecutor not at fault for unanticipated, nonresponsive testimony)
- In re Estrada, 63 Cal.2d 740 (presumption that ameliorative sentencing changes apply retroactively where judgment not final)