Case Law People v. Wright

People v. Wright

Document Cited Authorities (8) Cited in Related

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

EARL P.J.

Defendant Jedidiah James Wright stabbed John S. during an altercation killing him. A jury found him guilty of second degree murder. Defendant claims he was denied a fair trial when the court failed to properly instruct the jury and when his counsel failed to object to the prosecution's dilution of its standard of proof. We agree the jury was improperly instructed as to the wrongful conduct portion of CALCRIM No 571. We also agree defendant was thereby prejudiced. We shall therefore reverse the judgment and remand for a new trial.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The following events occurred at Comanche Creek, a public greenway/park located along the side of a small river. Homeless encampments sit along both sides of the river, where about 80 people live in tents or structures. Each camp is separate, and residents often mark the boundaries of their encampments with makeshift fencing. It is customary for individuals to stay out of marked areas unless they occupy the area or are invited to enter the area. There is a dirt pathway through the greenway for travel; police officers use the path to patrol the area in patrol cars, on bicycle, or on foot.

At the time of the incident, Amber B. lived in a trailer in the Comanche Creek parking lot. She had known John for about a year. On July 31, 2021, there was a fight between John's girlfriend, Amanda T.,[1] and another woman named Beth. According to Amber, John stopped them from fighting. A man named DJ was present for that fight.

DJ lived in a different area of Comanche Creek, next to defendant. On August 1, defendant saw DJ with a black eye bruised face, and other injuries. DJ told defendant that a man named John injured him in an incident connected to the fight between Amanda and Beth the day prior. DJ accompanied defendant as defendant investigated DJ's story and discovered where John was camped. Defendant told DJ that he would confront John but needed to use heroin first. Later, on his way to work, defendant walked over to John's campsite.

Eyewitness testimony about the altercation

A police officer interviewed Amanda at the scene and recorded the interview on his body-worn camera. Amanda told the officer that her boyfriend John was stabbed. She reported that she and John were hugging and kissing near his tent when she saw a tall, skinny man approach and stab John in the chest with a knife. John then picked something up from the ground and chased the man before collapsing. The jury viewed the body camera interview with Amanda.

Tammy T. also lived at Comanche Creek. When the stabbing happened, she was in a different campsite, about 25 to 30 feet away from John's campsite. She saw Amanda (her niece) screaming and John and another man "going around" a tree. John had a metal pipe or stick in his hand and was chasing the man and screaming.[2] The other man rounded the tree, went around a shopping cart that was at the edge of John's campsite, and then down the path toward the parking lot.

Tammy turned away to get groceries from her trunk. When she turned back, she saw John take a few steps then fall over on his face.

Amber was sitting across from John's camp, busy on her phone, when she heard a commotion. She looked up and saw defendant approach John and ask him if he was John. At this point, defendant was on the pathway to the side of John's camp; he and John walked toward each other. Defendant and John went "back and forth," "about to fight." Amber saw John turn to grab something. Amber could not see whether John had anything in his hand because she was not wearing her glasses. Defendant swung at John, hitting him. John grabbed a pole or stick of some sort and tried to give chase before he collapsed. At this point, Amber saw Amanda come out of the tent. The other man walked quickly toward the front entrance of the campground.

Defendant's account of the altercation

When defendant was arrested, he told officers "it was self-defense." His videotaped interview with detectives was viewed by the jury. Defendant also testified at trial.

In his interview, he explained he was friends with DJ. On the day of the stabbing, DJ told defendant of an encounter DJ had with John the day prior. According to defendant, DJ said that he told Amanda she was rude. John, who was Amanda's boyfriend, ran up behind DJ and sucker punched him, knocking him to the ground, and then kicked him. Defendant noticed that DJ had a black eye and a scrape on his (bald) head and was reportedly suffering from a concussion. Although defendant was not aware of DJ ever lying to him, defendant wanted to investigate for himself. When he did so, others told him a similar story.

Defendant was mad about what was done to DJ, but not furious. Defendant heard John had been drinking at the time of his altercation with DJ and understood that drinking can make people do things normally out of character. Although DJ hinted that defendant should take care of it, defendant did not tell DJ that he would do anything. He said, "Wait until I get well," meaning wait until he used heroin, and he would go confront John. At the same time, defendant was afraid of DJ's gang affiliations.

Aside from DJ's story, defendant knew nothing about John. DJ showed defendant where John's camp was located. Defendant did not see John and he returned to his own camp.

Later that day, defendant walked to John's camp to talk to him about his interaction with DJ. He hoped to find out what happened and to get John's side of the story. Defendant was not planning on fighting John. Defendant did not consider himself as a fighter; he was on his way to work and had no plans to get in a fight. He wanted to tell John that he messed up and that people in the area were upset with him about what he did to DJ. In the back of defendant's mind, however, he realized there was a possibility that there could be a fight if John became violent. Defendant stated he did not focus on that possibility.

Defendant said he always carried a small pocketknife for self-defense. On this day, it was partially folded in his back pocket. He sometimes carried the knife in this manner so he could use it quickly if necessary.

Defendant approached John's camp while smoking a cigarette. A girl standing nearby asked him what he wanted. Defendant said he was looking for John and asked if he was there. John stepped forward and identified himself. Defendant and John walked around obstructions toward each other. Defendant asked, "Can we talk?" Defendant denied any aggression on his part; he stated he displayed a nice and polite, nonconfrontational demeanor. He was not squared to fight. He was holding a cigarette in his left hand and had his right hand in his rear pocket just in case John wanted to fight.

John did not verbally respond. He hiked up his trousers and then appeared to pull a black object from his front pants pocket. Defendant feared that it could be a weapon but was not 100 percent sure that John had a weapon. John threw a "haymaker" punch aimed at defendant's face, but defendant dodged it. Defendant pulled the knife from his back pocket and opened it with one hand. John threw a second punch, like a jab, but it did not connect either. Defendant, holding the knife with the blade facing forward, jabbed John in the chest.

John took another swing that missed before he realized that he had been stabbed. When he saw that he was bleeding, he said, "son of a bitch," and then ran to grab a metal object that looked like a pipe or metal bar. Defendant walked away and started running when John tried to chase after him.

Defendant stated that the stabbing happened quickly; it was a "fight or flight" reaction. He was not thinking of different ways he could have responded once John started swinging. He did not intend to kill John. He said he only wanted to stop John's attack and, at most, hurt him. Afterward, he was pumped with adrenaline and freaking out in a daze because he had never used his knife before. While he was freaking out, he threw the knife away.

At trial, defendant testified in a manner consistent with his videotaped interview, providing some additional details we will recount here. Defendant testified that he was skeptical of DJ's story; DJ was an acquaintance and defendant did not believe everything DJ said. Defendant was worried that the conflict between John and DJ would invade his camp because he was DJ's neighbor, and someone might believe defendant "was involved with DJ." Defendant was more concerned for himself than for DJ.

Later that day, defendant walked to catch the last bus available for work. On the way, he decided to stop by John's campsite to "squash the beef" between DJ and John. Defendant testified that he only wanted to talk to John and did not intend a confrontation. From the path near John's site, defendant asked John if they could talk. Defendant and John approached each other and, when John was close, he pulled an object out of his pocket and swung at defendant. Defendant also stated he "was a little bit scared." Defendant dodged the punch and pulled his half-open pocketknife from his back pocket as John was taking another swing at him. Defendant was able to dodge that punch too and then swung his knife wildly at John. He thought it would hit John in the abdomen but stabbed him higher than he intended.

Defendant stood there, wondering if John was okay. John grabbed a pole and started to chase him. Defendant ran away.

Arrest, charges, and trial

Three men followed defendant out of the encampment to the market. One...

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

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

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