People v. Winn
257 Cal.Rptr.3d 885
Cal. Ct. App.2020Background
- In Feb. 2016 Alexander Winn stabbed David Derrington to death about two weeks after Winn and his wife were evicted from Derrington’s house; Winn admitted the killing but claimed self‑defense.
- Winn was tried by jury, convicted of first‑degree murder and found to have personally used a deadly weapon; he admitted five prior prison‑term allegations.
- Trial court sentenced Winn to an aggregate of 31 years‑to‑life (25‑to‑life + 1 year deadly‑weapon + five consecutive 1‑year prior‑term enhancements under former Pen. Code § 667.5(b)).
- On appeal Winn challenged (1) admission of a pre‑death portrait photo of the victim (and ineffective assistance for failure to object on some grounds), and (2) the trial court’s handling of a post‑verdict Marsden motion asserting counsel prevented Winn from testifying.
- After this court affirmed, the California Supreme Court transferred the case back for reconsideration under SB 136 (amending § 667.5(b) to limit one‑year prior‑term enhancements to sexually violent offenses).
- The Attorney General conceded retroactivity; the court struck the five prior‑term enhancements, reduced the aggregate sentence to 26 years‑to‑life, and affirmed as modified.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (People) | Defendant's Argument (Winn) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of pre‑death portrait photo | Photo was relevant to identity and to show victim wearing glasses like the crushed glasses at scene | Photo irrelevant and inflammatory under Evid. Code §§ 210, 352; counsel ineffective for failing to object on federal due‑process and § 352 grounds | Photo admission had limited probative value and was used beyond the narrow purpose, but any error was harmless given overwhelming evidence of premeditated murder; ineffective‑assistance claim not prejudicial |
| Marsden post‑verdict hearing (right to testify) | Court sufficiently inquired and denial was appropriate; no abuse of discretion | Court failed to probe Winn’s claim counsel rested without consulting him and thereby deprived him of his right to testify | Court should have questioned counsel about the claim; error occurred but was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt given the strength of the prosecution’s case and impeachment risk if Winn had testified |
| SB 136 retroactivity and prior‑term enhancements | AG conceded amended § 667.5(b) applies retroactively to nonfinal judgments | Winn sought retroactive benefit to eliminate five 1‑year prior‑term enhancements | Concession accepted; enhancements stricken; sentence modified to 26 years‑to‑life; judgment affirmed as modified |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Ramos, 30 Cal.3d 553 (Cal. 1982) (photographs of victim alive inadmissible when irrelevant)
- People v. Poggi, 45 Cal.3d 306 (Cal. 1988) (same)
- People v. Osband, 13 Cal.4th 622 (Cal. 1996) (cautions against admitting pre‑death photos unless relevance shown and use limited)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two‑prong ineffective assistance standard)
- People v. Marsden, 2 Cal.3d 118 (Cal. 1970) (procedure for defendant to seek substitution of appointed counsel)
- People v. Smith, 6 Cal.4th 684 (Cal. 1993) (Marsden inquiry is forward‑looking but must consider past performance)
- Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18 (U.S. 1967) (federal constitutional error harmless only beyond a reasonable doubt)
- In re Estrada, 63 Cal.2d 740 (Cal. 1965) (presumption of retroactivity for ameliorative statutory changes)
- People v. Lopez, 42 Cal.App.5th 337 (Cal. Ct. App. 2019) (no remand for resentencing when trial court imposed maximum sentence and amendment reduces punishment)