People v. Thomas
128 Cal. Rptr. 3d 489
| Cal. | 2011Background
- Thomas was convicted of first-degree murder of Creed Grote and attempted murder of Troy Ortiz, and of second-degree murder of Ricky McDonald, with multiple accompanying special circumstances and firearm enhancements, and sentenced to death.
- Halstead, as key prosecution witness, testified about prior violence by Thomas and Cooksey, and about the McDonald killing, with related ancillary crimes admitted for intent.
- In Grote/Ortiz, Thomas was identified as the shooter; Grote died from gunshot wounds and Ortiz survived; Halstead testified to Thomas’s conduct and to his post-shooting actions.
- The trial involved joinder of the McDonald and Grote/Ortiz charges, with two juries for separate matters and a shared court, prosecutor, and witnesses to some extent, and a complex penalty phase.
- The prosecution presented extensive evidence of Thomas’s prior violent offenses at penalty, including the Stockton robbery/murder and other violent incidents, to support a future dangerousness theory and aggravation.
- The court addressed severance, the admissibility of the Milton assault evidence, the reasonable doubt instruction in the guilt phase, death penalty qualification of jurors, and various sentencing law challenges.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Joinder vs. severance prejudice | McDonald and Grote/Ortiz joined, claimed prejudice. | Joinder prejudicial because cases weak/strong, cross-admissibility lacking. | No reversible prejudice; joinder proper; no abuse of discretion. |
| Admissibility of Milton assault evidence | Evidence shows intent/mental state in McDonald murder. | Evidence impermissible as prior bad acts to prove character. | Admissible under 1101 with limiting instruction; harmless error. |
| Guilt phase reasonable doubt instruction | Standard instruction insufficient to convey all elements beyond doubt. | Instruction flawed. | Not error; context of total instructions suffices. |
| For-cause excusal of prospective juror L.G. on death penalty views | L.G. biased against death penalty; Witt standard met. | Excusal improper based on questionnaire alone. | Excision upheld; Witt standard satisfied; bias shown. |
| Penalty phase: death is greater penalty instruction | Instruction appropriate to inform severity of death vs life without parole. | Instruction prejudicial or unnecessary. | Proper and not reversible error; constitutionally permissible. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Hartsch, 49 Cal.4th 472 (Cal. 2010) (joinder/ severance analysis; prejudice standard)
- People v. Soper, 45 Cal.4th 759 (Cal. 2009) (joinder prejudice balancing factors)
- Alcala v. Superior Court, 43 Cal.4th 1205 (Cal. 2008) (joinder; cross-admissibility not required; abuse of discretion standard)
- People v. Geier, 41 Cal.4th 555 (Cal. 2007) (instruction on separate counts; CALJIC 17.02 guidance)
- People v. Kipp, 18 Cal.4th 349 (Cal. 1998) (admissibility of uncharged crimes; substantial probative value standard)
- People v. Ewoldt, 7 Cal.4th 380 (Cal. 1994) (probative value vs. prejudice; standards for uncharged offenses)