People v. Thomas CA2/7, B258695

Victim Andre Lowe was shot after a fight outside a Hollywood club; multiple videos (TMZ, a valet’s cell phone, and nearby business footage) captured a man pointing a gun and a Porsche Cayenne running over the victim.
Video and investigative work led detectives to identify defendant Robert Earl Thomas III (nicknamed “Juicy”) as the shooter/driver; a usable fingerprint of Thomas was found on the Cayenne’s driver-side wood trim and DNA from Lowe was on the Cayenne’s fender.
Thomas was charged with first degree murder with gang and firearm enhancement allegations; the jury convicted and the court sentenced him to 50 years to life.
At trial, two law enforcement witnesses made brief references suggesting Thomas was in custody/on parole: LASD Detective Healy said she “checked to see if Mr. Thomas was still in custody” after seeing the video; LAPD Detective Frettlohr said “we contacted a parole agent.”
Defense counsel did not object to Healy’s statement and objected to Frettlohr’s remark (leading to a sidebar and admonishment); defense counsel later explained he did not press for mistrial because Thomas intended to testify and would thereby reveal his criminal history.
On appeal Thomas argued ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to object and failing to seek a mistrial when these references to custody/parole occurred.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether defense counsel was ineffective for not objecting/moving for mistrial after witnesses referenced custody/parole	The prosecutor/respondent contends counsel’s choices were reasonable tactical decisions given the fleeting nature of remarks and trial context	Thomas contends counsel’s failures allowed prejudicial references to his criminal status, requiring reversal	Held: Counsel’s conduct fell within reasonable professional assistance; omission was tactical and not shown to be ignorant of law; mistrial had no strong potential for success

Vines v. People, 51 Cal.4th 830 (discusses ineffective assistance standard under state law)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes federal two-part ineffective assistance test)
Carrasco v. People, 59 Cal.4th 924 (failure to request mistrial forfeits claim on appeal)
Haskett v. People, 30 Cal.3d 841 (motion for mistrial ineffective-assistance standards; must show omission grounded in ignorance and mistrial motion had strong potential)
Jennings v. People, 53 Cal.3d 334 (brief volunteered references to custody/prior incarceration not necessarily incurable; counsel need not always move for mistrial)
Ledesma v. People, 39 Cal.4th 641 (consider counsel’s decisions in context and avoid second-guessing reasonable strategic choices)
Stinson v. People, 214 Cal.App.2d 476 (discusses tactical decisions when defendant later testifies and admits prior convictions)