People v. Anthony
244 Cal. Rptr. 3d 499 · California Court of Appeal, 5th District · 2019
Facts
On May 16, 2009, a masked man exited a gold Cadillac occupied by three other men on a residential street in Berkeley, California, and fired 17 shots from an assault rifle at Charles Davis, killing him. The shooter's companions visibly celebrated before the four men sped away in the Cadillac. Police pursued the Cadillac in a high-speed chase that ended in two collisions, killing Todd Perea and Floyd Ross, Jr. The four defendants, Stephon Anthony, Samuel Flowers, Anthony Price, and Rafael Campbell, were arrested. The prosecution contended they were members of the "North Side Oakland" (NSO) criminal street gang and murdered Davis to avenge the shooting of a fellow NSO member by a rival Berkeley gang.
Procedural history
The four defendants were tried together in Alameda County Superior Court before a single jury, which found them guilty of multiple murders and other crimes. Prior to trial, the court denied Anthony's motion to exclude his May 18 statements and allowed the admission of gang expert testimony. The jury was instructed on theories of liability for first degree murder, including the natural and probable consequences doctrine. Each defendant filed a timely notice of appeal to this court.
Issue
Did the trial court err by admitting defendant Anthony's May 18, 2009 statements to police in violation of Miranda, and by admitting some of the gang expert's testimony in violation of Sanchez and Crawford? Was the trial court's instructional error regarding the natural and probable consequences doctrine for first degree murder, as later clarified by Chiu, harmless?
Holding
The trial court erred in admitting Anthony's May 18 statements and some gang expert testimony, and committed instructional error under Chiu, but these errors were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt due to overwhelming admissible evidence. The judgments were affirmed in their entirety, except for a remand to allow the trial court to exercise discretion on sentencing enhancements.
Rule
Under Miranda, statements obtained from a suspect in custodial interrogation without proper warnings or waiver are inadmissible. Under Sanchez and Crawford, an expert cannot relay case-specific testimonial hearsay unless independently proven or covered by an exception. Instructional error is harmless if the record demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt that the jury based its verdict on a legally valid theory. Errors are deemed harmless if, despite the error, overwhelming admissible evidence supports the conviction.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener
Case brief last reviewed . Prepared by CaseReader from the published opinion.