200 Cal. Rptr. 3d 739
Cal. Ct. App. 1st2016Background
- Defendant Casey Turner (15 at time) shot into a corridor by an apartment complex/market area, killing James Allen and grazing Damonte Starks and Burnett Raven; no gun recovered; multiple casings recovered.
- Turner convicted by jury of second degree murder and two counts of attempted murder; enhancements for personal firearm use and great bodily injury; aggregate sentence 84 years, 7 months to life.
- Defense requested jury instructions on perfect and imperfect self-defense (CALJIC Nos. 5.12, 5.17); trial court refused for lack of substantial evidence.
- Trial court instructed on a "kill zone" / concurrent intent theory (CALJIC No. 8.66.1) for attempted murder counts; jury convicted on that theory for attempted murder victims.
- On appeal Turner raised instructional error, Eighth Amendment challenge to his de facto LWOP term for a juvenile, and ineffective assistance of counsel; appellate court modified parole eligibility to 25 years and struck a $200 probation investigation fee.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Refusal to give perfect/imperfect self-defense instructions | Turner: evidence (prior fight, alleged threats, group confronting him) supported honest belief of imminent danger so instructions required | Prosecutor/AG: record lacks evidence defendant actually believed he faced imminent death or great bodily harm; Turner shot first | Court: Affirmed refusal — no substantial evidence of an actual/honest belief of imminent danger, so instructions properly denied |
| Kill-zone (concurrent intent) jury instruction for attempted murder | Turner: no specific intent to kill Starks/Raven — only conscious disregard (implied malice) — so kill-zone inapplicable | AG: jury could infer specific intent to kill everyone in corridor from number/direction of shots and closeness; Stone allows conviction without identified primary target | Court: Instruction proper; substantial evidence supported inference of concurrent intent (kill zone) and attempted murder convictions stand |
| Eighth Amendment challenge to 84‑year‑to‑life juvenile sentence (functional LWOP) | Turner: parole eligibility at age 99 is de facto LWOP and violates Graham/Miller/Caballero; counsel ineffective for not objecting | AG: Turner forfeited objection; Senate Bill 260 (Pen. Code §3051) provides parole eligibility mechanism that cures defect | Court: Sentence as originally imposed was constitutionally defective as a functional LWOP, but §3051 (SB 260) affords Turner a meaningful opportunity for parole; court modifies judgment to set parole eligibility at 25 years to cure defect |
| Ineffective assistance re: sentencing and probation fee | Turner (habeas): counsel failed to argue Eighth Amendment and failed to present mitigating youth evidence; also court erred in imposing $200 probation investigation fee without ability-to-pay determination | AG: forfeiture and §3051 ameliorates sentencing issue | Court: Counsel's sentencing advocacy was deficient but no prejudice shown because §3051 would control parole eligibility; probation investigation fee order vacated for lack of statutory ability‑to‑pay findings |
Key Cases Cited
- Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (U.S. 2012) (mandatory LWOP for juveniles unconstitutional; sentencing must consider youth-related mitigating factors)
- Graham v. Florida, 130 S. Ct. 2011 (U.S. 2010) (juvenile nonhomicide offenders must have meaningful opportunity for release)
- People v. Caballero, 282 P.3d 291 (Cal. 2012) (term‑of‑years that is functional LWOP for juvenile nonhomicide offenders violates Eighth Amendment; sentencing court must consider juvenile characteristics)
- People v. Bland, 48 P.3d 1107 (Cal. 2002) (discussion of implied malice and kill‑zone/concurrent intent doctrine in attempted murder context)
- People v. Stone, 205 P.3d 272 (Cal. 2009) (kill‑zone doctrine applies even when primary target is not identifiable; attempted murder judged separately per victim)