People v. Noyes CA3
Filed 11/20/25 P. v. Noyes CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Shasta) ----
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent, C101672
v. (Super. Ct. No. 20F6557)
JAMES JOSHUA NOYES,
Defendant and Appellant.
A jury convicted defendant James Joshua Noyes of first degree murder and evading a pursuing officer. Defendant admitted a prior strike conviction. The trial court found that defendant discharged a firearm causing death, and that he committed each offense while released on bail or his own recognizance in two other cases. Defendant previously had pleaded no contest to unlawful possession of a firearm and ammunition. The trial court sentenced defendant to state prison for an indeterminate term of 75 years to life consecutive to a determinate term of 17 years.1
1 A portion of the determinate term was imposed in connection with two other cases that are not part of this appeal.
1
Defendant claims his murder conviction must be reversed because the prosecutor misstated the law during closing argument. The claim is forfeited because defendant did not object to the challenged comments or request a curative admonition from the trial court. Anticipating this conclusion, defendant asserts his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance. Because defendant has not carried his appellate burden of demonstrating ineffective assistance of counsel, we will affirm the judgment. BACKGROUND On October 4, 2020, sometime between 2:00 and 3:00 a.m., V.T. and T.J. pulled into a Redding parking lot in V.T.’s RV. V.T. lived in the vehicle and parked it there for weeks at a time. T.J. lacked permanent housing and often drove the RV for V.T. A few minutes after their arrival, Emmanuel Vega and another man rode their bicycles to the parking lot and started talking with V.T. and J.T. Other unhoused individuals were at the parking lot that night. Defendant came to the parking lot with another man in a distinctive car that defendant owned. He walked over to the RV and asked the group “who was in charge” or “who was running the show.” When no one else answered, Vega responded: “Well, I guess that’s me.” Apparently referring to California’s prison classification system, defendant referred to himself as a “Level 4.” Vega responded: “Oh, you beat me by one because I’m a Level 3.” After arguing about who was tougher, defendant started to walk away, at which point Vega called him a “290,” meaning a sex offender. Vega said something like “you ain’t tough” or “I’ll kick your ass.” Defendant lifted his shirt to show a handgun in his waistband. Vega approached defendant while holding a small aluminum T-ball bat; he referred to defendant’s handgun as a “little BB gun” and told defendant to go ahead and shoot him. Defendant backed away and pointed his gun at Vega. Vega told defendant he would “kick his ass.” Defendant responded: “Fuck you, I’ll just shoot you.” Vega again dared defendant to shoot. Defendant fired two rounds. The first bullet missed, but the second
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)