Defense counsel agreed, but indicated that defendant preferred leg chains. ] (People v. Hayes, supra, 21 Cal.4th at p. 1281, 91 Cal.Rptr.2d 211, 989 P.2d 645.). That guarantee mandates that the pools from which juries are drawn must not systematically exclude distinctive groups in the community. (People v. Thomas (1992) 2 Cal.4th 489, 524, 7 Cal.Rptr.2d 199, 828 P.2d 101.) Weeks's opinion, there was an absolute disparity of 12.3 percentage points between the 14 percent of persons who appeared for jury service in the Central Judicial District and identified themselves as Hispanic and the 26.3 percent of the population of the Central Judicial District who were Hispanics who were eligible for jury service. Nothing in the record before us supports the conclusion that defendant's chances of receiving a fair trial were irreparably damaged. Defendant personally waived his right to testify in his own behalf and stated that he agreed with his counsel's decision not to present any additional evidence at the penalty phase. You shall consider, take into account and be guided by the following factors, if applicable:(a)The circumstances of the crimes of which the defendant was convicted in the present proceeding and the existence of any special circumstances found to be true.(b)The presence or absence of criminal activity by the defendant, other than the crimes for which the defendant has been tried in the present proceedings, which involved the use or attempted use of force or violence or the express or implied threat to use force or violence or the express or implied threat to use force or violence.(c)The presence or absence of any prior felony conviction, other than the crimes for which the defendant has been tried in the present proceedings.(d)Whether or not the offense was committed while the defendant was under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance.(e)Whether or not the victim was a participant in the defendant's homicidal conduct or consented to the homicidal act.(f)Whether or not the offense was committed under circumstances which the defendant reasonably believed to be a moral justification or extenuation for his conduct.(g)Whether or not the defendant acted under extreme duress or under the substantial domination of another person.(h)Whether or not at the time of the offenses the capacity of the defendant to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of law was impaired as a result of mental disease or defect or the effects of intoxication.(i)The age of the defendant at the time of the crime.(j)Whether or not the defendant was an accomplice to the offense and his participation in the commission of the offense was relatively minor.(k)Any other circumstance which extenuates the gravity of the crime even though it is not a legal excuse for the crime and any sympathetic or other aspect of the defendant's character or record as a basis for a sentence less than death, whether or not related to the offense for which he is on trial.. A screen had been removed from an open bathroom window and was lying on the ground. (a). Defendant claims that the trial court erred in admitting into evidence photographs of eight of the victims because those photographs were irrelevant, gruesome, and highly inflammatory. In the docuseries, detective Frank Salerno says, he got comfortable after killing someone he would take the time to have a snack. We have no question in our mind at this point that there is a conflict in this case; however, we realize the concerns of the court. The car was running with the transmission in reverse. Before dawn on May 30, 1985, Carol K. was awakened in her Burbank home by defendant. (1239, subd. As she got up, she heard a muffled loud sound. She ran around to the front of the condominium complex and saw defendant leaving the complex. ] (People v. Panah, supra, 35 Cal.4th 395, 447, 25 Cal.Rptr.3d 672, 107 P.3d 790. Defendant maintains that he was deprived of his rights under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the federal Constitution because the trial court ordered that his determinate sentence of more than 59 years be served after execution of the death sentence. The court instructed the jury that in determining the proper penalty it should disregard the instructions given at the guilt phase of the trial and consider any sympathetic or other aspect of the defendant's character or record, adding again, You must disregard any jury instruction given to you in the guilt or innocence phase of this trial which conflicts with this principle. The jurors further were instructed that they were free to assign whatever moral or sympathetic value you deem appropriate to each and all of the various factors you are permitted to consider.. 191, 800 P.2d 547, this Court held that both Daniel Hernandez and Arturo Hernandez should properly have been discharged by the trial court as retained counsel on the defendant's motion based on their incompetence in a pending murder case. This does not accurately describe our decision in Ortiz. Her skull had been fractured; the injury could have been caused by a hammer. 1692, the trial court denied the defendant's request to substitute counsel because it found that the proposed attorney had an irreconcilable conflict of interest that the defendant was not permitted to waive. Defense counsel's request for a psychiatric evaluation of defendant, standing alone, does not require the court to appoint such an expert or conduct a competency hearing. Defendant admits, however, that [c]ounsel's failure to present mitigating evidence on appellant's behalf was not explained on the record. Defendant offers no support for his assertion that the likely cause of his attorneys' decision not to present further evidence at the penalty phase was a conflict of interest caused by his family, and we decline to speculate. 191, 800 P.2d 547.) 664, 58 L.Ed.2d 579; People v. Burgener (2003) 29 Cal.4th 833, 855, 129 Cal.Rptr.2d 747, 62 P.3d 1.) at pp. Salerno as a sign of respect, but he also looked up to The Hillside Strangler a serial killer Salerno had previously apprehended. omitted.) She was one of the few who actually had a good look at the Night Stalker. An associate of defendant's later testified that the cap looked like one defendant wore. The documentary series also delves into Ramirezs past and the horrible trauma Ramirez had to face as a child. On September 27, 1989, defense counsel announced that the defense had made a tactical decision not to present any evidence at the penalty phase. As the four-part test is stated in the conjunctive, joinder may be appropriate even though the evidence is not cross-admissible (People v. Ochoa (2001) 26 Cal.4th 398, 423, 110 Cal.Rptr.2d 324, 28 P.3d 78.). The temperature of the victim's liver indicated she had been dead only a couple of hours, but that estimate may have been inaccurate, because the body had been covered and the room may have been warm. He was previously married to Maxine Zazzara and Betty Grace Peterson Zazzara. Failure to Narrow Class of Death-eligible Defendants, Defendant contends that the death penalty statute applicable in this case failed to meaningfully narrow the class of defendants eligible for the death penalty, in violation of the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the federal Constitution. Defendant made Carol K. and her son lie on the floor and covered them with a sheet. Arturo Hernandez represented that defendant had entered into a written contract retaining him and Daniel Hernandez as his attorneys. Proc., 233, 234.) Defendant expressly does not raise an assignment of error as to counsel's conflicts of interest with respect to the retainer agreements, preferring to raise this issue in a subsequent petition for writ of habeas corpus. As defendant recognizes, we repeatedly have rejected this claim. Our attention, therefore, focuses on the two remaining factors-the nature and extent of the media coverage and the size of the community., The trial court described the media coverage of the murders and defendant's arrest as saturation, as much as they possibly can give, but noted that such coverage was not unprecedented in Los Angeles County. This appeal is automatic. 644, 431 P.2d 228.). [Citations.] The right to counsel of choice is one of the constitutional rights most basic to a fair trial. [Citation. Her blouse had been pulled up. Calif.Only that it has something to do with the Night Stalker and that was revealed in the courtroom by the judge.He's accused of a feloney [sic]., 6. 1. They entered and found Vincent Zazzara lying dead on the couch in the den. Defendant introduced evidence that participation in Neighborhood Watch programs probably doubled while the murders were occurring. Garden of The victim repeated her identification of defendant at trial. Based upon the 1980 census as well as data compiled by California State University, Dr. Mr. Ramirez, would you rise, please, take your glasses off and face my clerk. When there was no reply, he entered the house through the unlocked door and found Bell and Florence L. Florence L. was lying on her bed in one bedroom. Defendant claims that the trial court erred in failing to order a competency hearing during the penalty phase based upon additional instances of appellant's bizarre behavior during guilt trial deliberations and on the occasion the jury returned its verdicts. Defendant relies upon his threats to disrupt and actual disruptions of trial proceedings, which caused the trial court to permit defendant to absent himself from the trial and listen to the proceedings in a holding cell. The trial court in the present case concluded that it was necessary to physically restrain defendant in view of the history of this case, and some of the statements made by Mr. Ramirez. Defendant's bizarre actions following his arrest made it reasonable for the court to fear that defendant would act violently.