People v. Martinez10/31/2002
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On June 6, 2000, an information filed in the Superior Court of Fresno County charged appellant, Felix Russell Martinez, with two counts (counts 1 & 2) of attempted murder (Pen. Code, §§ 187, subd. (a), 664). Appended to each of these counts it was alleged that appellant personally and intentionally discharged a firearm, within the meaning of section 12022.53, subdivision (c), and that appellant personally used a firearm within the meaning of section 12022.5, subdivision (a)(1) and section 12022.53, subdivision (b). Counts 3 and 4 alleged appellant committed an assault with a semi-automatic firearm in violation of section 245, subdivision (b). Counts 5 and 6 alleged appellant committed an assault with a firearm in violation of section 245, subdivision (a)(2). Count 7 alleged appellant fired at an occupied motor vehicle in violation of section 246. Appended to counts 3 through 7 it was alleged that appellant personally used a firearm within the meaning of section 1203.06, subdivision (a)(1) and section 12022.5, subdivision (a)(1). The victims named in counts 1 through 6 were appellant's stepfather, Andrew K., and appellant's half-sister, Heather K. Count 8 alleged appellant made terrorist threats (§ 422) to Andrew K. Counts 9 through 11 alleged appellant committed an assault on a peace officer with a semi-automatic handgun, in violation of section 245, subdivision (d)(2). Appended to counts 9 through 11 it was alleged that appellant used a firearm within the meaning of sections 12022.53, subdivision (b) and 12022.5, subdivision (a). Count 12 alleged appellant discharged a firearm with gross negligence, in violation of section 246.3. Count 13 alleged appellant resisted executive officers in the performance of their duties, a violation of section 69. Appended to count 13 it was alleged appellant personally and intentionally discharged a firearm within the meaning of section 12022.53, subdivision (c), and that appellant personally used a firearm within the meaning of sections 12022.53, subdivision (b) and 12022.5, subdivision (a)(1).
Prior to jury selection on August 29, 2000, the prosecution's motion verbally amending the information was granted. The amendment struck counts 9, 10, and 11. Count 12 was renumbered to count 9 and count 13 was renumbered to count 10. The amendment also deleted the allegation appended to count 7 that appellant had personally used a firearm within the meaning of section 12022.5, subdivision (a)(1), deleted the allegations appended to former count 13, now count 10, alleging appellant had personally and intentionally discharged a firearm within the meaning of section 12022.53, subdivision (c), and that appellant had personally used a firearm within the meaning of section 12022.5, subdivision (b).
On August 30, 2000, testimony commenced in appellant's jury trial. On September 7, 2000, the jury returned its verdicts finding appellant guilty on counts 1, and 3 through 10. The jury also found as true all allegations appended to those counts. Appellant was found not guilty of count 2, the attempted murder of his half-sister.
On October 24, 2000, the date set for appellant's sentencing, appellant's trial counsel requested appellant be evaluated by a psychiatrist to assist counsel in determining whether or not there was an issue as to appellant's competency. Appellant's trial counsel had some concern about appellant's competency due to his claims of auditory hallucinations. After hearing from both counsel, the court ordered a psychiatric evaluation under the auspices of Evidence Code section 460. The court appointed Dr. A. A. Howsepian to conduct the psychiatric evaluation, based, in part, upon the recommendation of appe
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 California DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|