Case Law People v. Champion

People v. Champion

Document Cited Authorities (113) Cited in (861) Related

R. Charles Johnson, Petaluma and Nicholas C. Arguimbau, under appointments by the Supreme Court, Maureen M. Bodo, San Francisco and Steven E. Feldman, San Diego, for defendants and appellants.

John K. Van de Kamp and Daniel E. Lungren, Attys. Gen., Steve White and George Williamson, Chief Asst. Attys. Gen., Carol Wendelin Pollack, Asst. Atty. Gen., Robert R. Anderson, John R. Gorey, Shunji Asari, Robert S. Henry and Susan D. Martynec, Deputy Attys. Gen., for plaintiff and respondent.

KENNARD, Justice.

A jury convicted defendant Stephen Allen Champion of two counts of murder (Pen.Code, § 187), 1 two counts of robbery (§ 211) and one count of burglary (§ 459), finding that he was armed with a firearm in the course of each offense (§ 12022, subd. (a)). On the two counts of murder, the jury found the existence of these special circumstances: robbery murder (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(i)), burglary murder (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(vii)), and multiple murder (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(3)).

The same jury also convicted defendant Craig Anthony Ross of three counts of murder (§ 187), five counts of robbery (§ 211), two counts of burglary (§ 459) and one count of rape in concert (§§ 261, former subd. (2), 264.1), finding that he was armed with a firearm in the course of each offense (§ 12022, subd. (a)). On the three counts of murder, the jury found these special circumstances: robbery murder (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(i)), burglary murder (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(vii)), and multiple murder (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(3)). In addition, on one of the counts of murder, the jury found a rape-murder special circumstance (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(iii)).

At the penalty phase, the jury returned verdicts of death as to both defendants. Defendants' appeals to this court are automatic. (§ 1239, subd. (b).)

Although we conclude that certain duplicative special-circumstance findings must be stricken, we affirm both judgments in all other respects.

I. FACTS
A. Facts Relating to Guilt
1. Murders of Bobby Hassan and His Son, Eric

On the morning of December 12, 1980, Mercie Hassan left her home at 849 West 126th Street, Los Angeles, to go to work. Residing with her were her husband, Bobby Hassan (an unemployed carpenter who sold marijuana and sometimes cocaine), and their four children. Mercie spoke to Bobby on the telephone between 11:00 and 11:30 that morning. Bobby normally picked up their 14-year-old son, Eric, from school at noon and brought him home for lunch.

Sometime around noon, Elizabeth Moncrief, a nurse working for an elderly woman across the street from the Hassan residence, saw Bobby and Eric return home. Half an hour later, she saw a large gold or cream-colored Cadillac containing 4 Black males, ages 19-25, parked in front of the Hassan home. Moncrief went outside and took a close look at the car. About five minutes later, she saw two of the men get out of the car and knock at the Hassans' door. There was a struggle at the door, and the two men entered. The other two men then got out of the car and entered the house, and someone closed the curtains in the Hassan residence.

Later, Moncrief saw all four men leave the house. One was holding a pink pillowcase with something in it; the others were carrying paper bags containing unknown items. Moncrief was able to get a particularly good look at the last man who left the house, a tall man with heavy lips, a scar on his face, and either a chipped tooth or a gap between his teeth. She paid closer attention to this man because she had seen him once in Helen Keller Park, which was just across the street.

Mercie Hassan returned home at about 3:30 p.m. The house had been ransacked. Part of the lunch she had prepared for Bobby and Eric was on the floor, along with wrapping paper from the children's Christmas presents. Several of the presents were missing, as were some colored pillowcases and a .357-caliber Ruger Security Six revolver. Police, called to the scene, found the bodies of Bobby and Eric Hassan in the bedroom, lying on the bed. Each had been shot once in the head. Bobby's hands were tied behind his back, and three rings and a necklace he customarily wore were missing.

Defendant Champion was arrested on January 9, 1981. When arrested, he was wearing a yellow metal ring with white stones and a gold chain necklace that contained a charm bearing half of a king-of-hearts playing card. Mercie Hassan identified the ring and charm as belonging to her husband, Bobby. Latent fingerprints lifted from the Christmas wrapping paper and from a white cardboard box matched defendant Ross's fingerprints.

A month after the robbery, Moncrief selected defendant Champion's picture from a photographic lineup, saying he could have been one of the men she had seen at the Hassan house. Three days later she positively identified Champion at a physical lineup at the Los Angeles County jail. She also positively identified him at trial as the fourth man she saw leaving the Hassan home. In addition, she identified a photograph of a brown Buick automobile linked to defendants (see part I.A.2., post ) as being the car she had seen in front of the Hassan home. 2 Earlier, at a wrecking yard to which the police had taken her, Moncrief recognized the Buick as the car in question because of a distinctive dent on its right front.

On cross-examination, Moncrief acknowledged that at an early stage in the murder investigation she had identified two other men, Benjamin Brown and Clarence Reed, as the men she saw visit the Hassan home, and she had identified their car, a Chrysler, as the one she had seen in front of the Hassan home.

Reed and Brown had become suspects in the police investigation because: (1) both were involved in an attempted robbery elsewhere in Los Angeles the day after the Hassan murders, during which Reed was killed; (2) Mercie Hassan identified Brown as a person who had been to her house to buy marijuana from her husband; and (3) Mercie Hassan told police that on several occasions she had answered telephone calls from a person named "Clarence" who wanted to buy drugs. To show that Reed and Brown did not commit the murders, the prosecution called Brown, who testified that he had spent the day at home, and Reed's employer, who produced a "time card" (on the back of a cigarette carton) showing that Reed was at work in a grocery/liquor store at the time of the murder.

A ballistics expert testified that Bobby Hassan was killed by a .357-caliber bullet with rifling characteristics; the latter are produced by the gun that fired the bullet, and were described by the expert as "six lands and grooves with a left hand twist." The expert also testified that most Colt revolvers produce these particular characteristics. The prosecution produced photographs, found in defendant Champion's home, showing each defendant holding a Colt revolver. But Benjamin Brown, when arrested for the attempted robbery that resulted in the death of Clarence Reed, was found in possession of a gun that produced the same rifling characteristics.

A jury found defendants Champion and Ross guilty of burglarizing the Hassan home and of robbing and killing Bobby and Eric Hassan.

2. The Murder of Michael Taylor

During the evening of December 27, 1980, three men came to the door of Cora Taylor's apartment at 11810 1/2 Vermont Avenue, not far from the Hassan home. Residing with Cora were her son Michael (who sold marijuana) and her daughter Mary. The men, one of whom Cora identified at trial as defendant Ross, walked into the living room and asked to speak to Michael. When Michael and Mary came out of the next room, accompanied by William Birdsong, a friend who was visiting, one of the men, whom Cora and Mary later identified as Evan Malett, grabbed Birdsong. A struggle ensued, which ended when Malett drew a gun and ordered Cora, Mary, Michael, and Birdsong to sit on the bed. Malett then demanded money and drugs. When Mary said they did not have any, one of the three men hit her in the jaw with his fist. The men then ordered the Taylors and Birdsong to lie face down on the bed, opened Cora's purse, and ransacked the premises. While the three robbers were rummaging through the apartment, a fourth man (apparently a lookout) came to the door but did not enter.

At Cora's urging, Michael told the robbers that there was money in a box in the kitchen. At that point one of the men, whom Mary later identified as defendant Ross, grabbed Mary by the hair and forced her to go into the bathroom, where he raped her. He then left the bathroom, returning moments later to rape Mary again. Thereafter, Malett entered the bathroom and unsuccessfully tried to rape Mary.

The three men then ordered Birdsong and Cora to join Mary in the bathroom. A short time later, Cora and Mary heard a shot. After a few minutes, they left the bathroom and found Michael in the living room, dead. A prosecution expert testified that Michael had died from a single shot from a high-powered weapon (such as a .357 magnum), fired at close range. The agent also testified that the gun used to kill Bobby Hassan could not have been the murder weapon, but that the bullet could have been fired by the .357-caliber Ruger stolen from the Hassan home.

Missing from the Taylor's apartment was an 8-track tape player. Also missing was a Christmas present--a photo album--which had been taken out of its wrapping.

Later that night, shortly after midnight, Los Angeles County Deputy Sheriff Ted Naimy saw a brown Buick automobile that contained four Black males and did not have its headlights turned on in the neighborhood where Michael Taylor had been murdered. As the Buick pulled alongside of...

5 cases
Document | California Supreme Court – 2021
People v. Baker
"...the evenhandedness of the court's questioning. Regardless, the claim does not warrant reversal. (See People v. Champion (1995) 9 Cal.4th 879, 909, 39 Cal.Rptr.2d 547, 891 P.2d 93 [no reversal when defense permitted to participate in voir dire of prospective jurors and "defendants do not con..."
Document | California Supreme Court – 2018
People v. Anderson
"...factor that the jury may consider in its penalty deliberations. ( [Pen. Code,] § 190.3, factor (a).)’ ( People v. Champion (1995) 9 Cal.4th 879, 947 [39 Cal.Rptr.2d 547, 891 P.2d 93].) ‘Factor (a) of [Penal Code] section 190.3 allows the prosecutor and defense counsel to present to the pena..."
Document | California Supreme Court – 2020
People v. Schultz
"...it." ( People v. Williams (1997) 16 Cal.4th 153, 193, 66 Cal.Rptr.2d 123, 940 P.2d 710, citing People v. Champion (1995) 9 Cal.4th 879, 922–923, 39 Cal.Rptr.2d 547, 891 P.2d 93.) The trial court here did scrutinize the evidence, limiting its admission to the fact of the correspondence and s..."
Document | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of California – 2014
Montiel v. Chappell
"...the same claims in other cases. See People v. Keenan, 46 Cal.3d 478, 505 (1988); Caro, supra, 46 Cal. 3d at 1068; People v. Champion, 9 Cal. 4th 879, 907 (1995), overruled on other grounds by People v. Combs, 34 Cal. 4th 821, 860 (2004). The same claims also have been rejected by the United..."
Document | U.S. District Court — Southern District of California – 2018
Jurado v. Davis
"...grounds at trial. Assuming without deciding that the issue is preserved for appellate review (see People v. Champion (1995) 9 Cal.4th 879, 908, fn. 6, 39 Cal.Rptr.2d 547, 891 P.2d 93; see also People v. Partida (2005) 37 Cal.4th 428, 35 Cal.Rptr.3d 644, 122 P.3d 765), the claim is without m..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial
5 books and journal articles
Document | California Objections – 2023
Expert witnesses
"...fact finder lacks the knowledge or skills necessary to interpret the facts or to draw conclusions from them. People v. Champion (1995) 9 Cal. 4th 879, 924-925, 39 Cal. Rptr. 2d 547. Many complex scientific questions require expert analysis so that the trier of fact can make an informed and ..."
Document | California Objections – 2023
Hearsay
"...that the recorder was experienced in the business’ practices and was required to record the event immediately. People v. Champion (1995) 9 Cal. 4th 879, 915, 39 Cal. Rptr. 2d 547. The custodian or qualified witnesses must testify as to the identity and mode of preparation of the records. Pe..."
Document | Chapter 2 Foundation
Chapter 2 - §11. Expert opinion
"...weapons to retaliation action against rival gang leader). (e) The significance and meaning of gang terminology. People v. Champion (1995) 9 Cal.4th 879, 924, overruled on other grounds, People v. Combs (2004) 34 Cal.4th 821. (f) Whether members of a criminal street gang would threaten or in..."
Document | California Objections – 2023
Jury selection
"...objecting to the removal of jurors for hardship must do so on the record to preserve the issue for appeal. People v. Champion (1995) 9 Cal. 4th 879, 907, 39 Cal. Rptr. 2d 547. Making the Objection • Discuss the court’s procedure for handling claims of hardship prior to jury selection. Reque..."
Document | Contents – 2017
Commonly Used Experts
"...not objectionable because of its pertinence to the issue of whether the gang was engaged in racketeering activity. People v. Champion , 9 Cal. 4th 879, 39 Cal. Rptr. 2d 547 (1995) was a murder prosecution in which the California Supreme Court held that the trial court was correct in permitt..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 books and journal articles
Document | California Objections – 2023
Expert witnesses
"...fact finder lacks the knowledge or skills necessary to interpret the facts or to draw conclusions from them. People v. Champion (1995) 9 Cal. 4th 879, 924-925, 39 Cal. Rptr. 2d 547. Many complex scientific questions require expert analysis so that the trier of fact can make an informed and ..."
Document | California Objections – 2023
Hearsay
"...that the recorder was experienced in the business’ practices and was required to record the event immediately. People v. Champion (1995) 9 Cal. 4th 879, 915, 39 Cal. Rptr. 2d 547. The custodian or qualified witnesses must testify as to the identity and mode of preparation of the records. Pe..."
Document | Chapter 2 Foundation
Chapter 2 - §11. Expert opinion
"...weapons to retaliation action against rival gang leader). (e) The significance and meaning of gang terminology. People v. Champion (1995) 9 Cal.4th 879, 924, overruled on other grounds, People v. Combs (2004) 34 Cal.4th 821. (f) Whether members of a criminal street gang would threaten or in..."
Document | California Objections – 2023
Jury selection
"...objecting to the removal of jurors for hardship must do so on the record to preserve the issue for appeal. People v. Champion (1995) 9 Cal. 4th 879, 907, 39 Cal. Rptr. 2d 547. Making the Objection • Discuss the court’s procedure for handling claims of hardship prior to jury selection. Reque..."
Document | Contents – 2017
Commonly Used Experts
"...not objectionable because of its pertinence to the issue of whether the gang was engaged in racketeering activity. People v. Champion , 9 Cal. 4th 879, 39 Cal. Rptr. 2d 547 (1995) was a murder prosecution in which the California Supreme Court held that the trial court was correct in permitt..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 cases
Document | California Supreme Court – 2021
People v. Baker
"...the evenhandedness of the court's questioning. Regardless, the claim does not warrant reversal. (See People v. Champion (1995) 9 Cal.4th 879, 909, 39 Cal.Rptr.2d 547, 891 P.2d 93 [no reversal when defense permitted to participate in voir dire of prospective jurors and "defendants do not con..."
Document | California Supreme Court – 2018
People v. Anderson
"...factor that the jury may consider in its penalty deliberations. ( [Pen. Code,] § 190.3, factor (a).)’ ( People v. Champion (1995) 9 Cal.4th 879, 947 [39 Cal.Rptr.2d 547, 891 P.2d 93].) ‘Factor (a) of [Penal Code] section 190.3 allows the prosecutor and defense counsel to present to the pena..."
Document | California Supreme Court – 2020
People v. Schultz
"...it." ( People v. Williams (1997) 16 Cal.4th 153, 193, 66 Cal.Rptr.2d 123, 940 P.2d 710, citing People v. Champion (1995) 9 Cal.4th 879, 922–923, 39 Cal.Rptr.2d 547, 891 P.2d 93.) The trial court here did scrutinize the evidence, limiting its admission to the fact of the correspondence and s..."
Document | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of California – 2014
Montiel v. Chappell
"...the same claims in other cases. See People v. Keenan, 46 Cal.3d 478, 505 (1988); Caro, supra, 46 Cal. 3d at 1068; People v. Champion, 9 Cal. 4th 879, 907 (1995), overruled on other grounds by People v. Combs, 34 Cal. 4th 821, 860 (2004). The same claims also have been rejected by the United..."
Document | U.S. District Court — Southern District of California – 2018
Jurado v. Davis
"...grounds at trial. Assuming without deciding that the issue is preserved for appellate review (see People v. Champion (1995) 9 Cal.4th 879, 908, fn. 6, 39 Cal.Rptr.2d 547, 891 P.2d 93; see also People v. Partida (2005) 37 Cal.4th 428, 35 Cal.Rptr.3d 644, 122 P.3d 765), the claim is without m..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex