People v. Suarez CA6
H041111
| Cal. Ct. App. | Oct 5, 2016Background
- On Sept. 5, 2012 Suarez drove by two brothers, pointed a gun, shouted gang-related epithets, then fired one shot; he was later arrested and methamphetamine was found in the patrol car.
- Jury convicted Suarez of felony assault with a firearm (count 1) with a §12022.5 firearm-use enhancement, misdemeanor brandishing (§417) (count 2), felon in possession (§29800) (count 4), and possession of methamphetamine (count 5); jury deadlocked on negligent discharge (count 3) and gang allegations, later dismissed.
- Trial prosecutor used a peremptory challenge to remove prospective juror P.L., who appeared Hispanic; defense objected under Batson/Wheeler; the prosecutor volunteered reasons (juror’s hostile look, possible juvenile record, wife a probation youth counselor); trial court denied the Wheeler/Batson motion after crediting the prosecutor’s explanations.
- At sentencing trial court imposed aggregate prison term (later suspended) and probation with concurrent prison terms and one-year county-jail terms as conditions of probation; court stayed punishment for brandishing but did not expressly impose-and-stay the sentence as required by §654 procedure.
- On appeal Suarez argued the prosecutor used a peremptory strike discriminatorily, §654 barred punishment on count 4 or its probationary jail term, fines lacked statutory bases, and presentence conduct credits were miscalculated.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether prosecutor’s peremptory strike of Hispanic juror violated Batson/Wheeler | Prosecutor’s strike was racially motivated; removal of a single Hispanic juror violated equal protection | Strike was race-neutral: juror’s hostile look, possible juvenile record, and wife’s probation job justified challenge | Court reviewed at Batson’s third stage (hybrid) and affirmed: trial court credibly found prosecutor’s reasons genuine and nondiscriminatory |
| Appropriate standard of appellate review when prosecutor volunteers reasons before prima facie finding | Suarez: Hernandez permits third-stage review when prosecutor volunteers reasons before trial court’s prima facie ruling | People: where trial court expressly finds no prima facie case, appellate review should begin at first stage; Scott supports that approach | Court treated this as a first-stage/third-stage hybrid (Chism/Mills) and proceeded to third-stage review, finding trial court’s credibility determination entitled to deference |
| Whether §654 barred punishment for felon-in-possession (count 4) and the probationary one-year jail term | Suarez: count 4 arose from same indivisible course of conduct as the assault/brandishing; multiple punishment barred | People: evidence (possession before drive-by, phone messages indicating possession/intent) supports separate, antecedent possession with independent objective | Court held substantial evidence supports trial court’s implicit finding possession was divisible/antecedent; concurrent prison term and one-year jail condition did not violate §654 |
| Sentencing defects: failure to state statutory bases for fines; failure to impose-and-stay sentence for count 2; miscalculation of presentence credits | Suarez: trial court failed to state statutory bases; did not impose then stay count 2 sentence; misapplied presentence credit law | People: conceded some errors; agreed presentence credit/fine statement require correction | Court ordered remand for limited resentencing: (1) impose and stay sentence on count 2 per §654, (2) specify statutory bases for fines, (3) recalculate presentence credits under §4019 and forward amended abstract of judgment |
Key Cases Cited
- Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (prohibition on race-based peremptory challenges under Equal Protection)
- Wheeler v. People, 22 Cal.3d 258 (Cal. rule against group-based peremptory exclusions)
- Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352 (third-stage review appropriate when prosecutor volunteers reasons and court rules on ultimate discrimination question)
- Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322 (trial court credibility determinations in Batson review entitled to deference)
- People v. Scott, 61 Cal.4th 363 (procedural guidance on which Batson stage appellate review should begin when trial court rules no prima facie case but also addresses reasons)
- People v. Chism, 58 Cal.4th 1266 (first-stage/third-stage Batson hybrid; appellate courts may skip to third stage)
- People v. Bradford, 17 Cal.3d 8 (possession of firearm punishable separately only when possession is antecedent and distinct from primary offense)
- People v. Jones, 103 Cal.App.4th 1139 (possession by ex-felon may be separate where defendant already possessed firearm before committing primary offense)