People v. Carrillo CA3

Filed 10/16/13 P. v. Carrillo CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Placer) ----

THE PEOPLE, C070985

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 62106577)

v.

RAYMOND CARRILLO,

Defendant and Appellant.

In a tiny homeless camp in Auburn, the victim and the two witnesses wore ankle tracking devices as registered sex offenders. There was a generator and gasoline at the camp to keep the sex offenders’ tracking devices charged. Defendant Raymond Carrillo, who lived in the camp but was not a sex offender, doused the victim’s tent with gasoline and set it ablaze. On appeal, following his conviction of attempted murder, arson, mayhem, and torture, defendant raises various evidentiary and instructional errors and contends his lawyer did not provide constitutionally adequate representation because he failed to pursue a voluntary intoxication defense. We affirm.

1

FACTS There are only four players in the drama that unfolded on the night of May 24, 2011, in the homeless camp: defendant and his girlfriend, Terry Holmstrom, and the victim Timmy Swensen and his sidekick, David Ward. One of the regular inhabitants was gone that night and another slept through it. Besides their convictions for various sex crimes, Swensen, Ward, and Holmstrom had extensive criminal histories. All were subjected to vigorous cross-examination, not only to impeach them with their numerous convictions, but to expose the many inconsistencies in their first-hand accounts of what defendant did and said when lighting Swensen’s tent on fire. Ward and Holmstrom both testified that about two or three weeks before Swensen was burned, defendant held Holmstrom in a bear hug over the campfire. He had been drinking and they had been quarrelling. Her shoes melted. Otherwise she was not injured. Defendant and Holmstrom were drinking by the campfire when Swensen and Ward returned from the “Welcome Center” about 6:30 p.m. and sat down with them near the fire. Neither Swensen nor Ward drank alcohol that night. Swensen testified that he believed defendant was drunk. Ward went into his tent about 7:00 p.m. Shortly thereafter, Holmstrom went into the tent she shared with defendant. Both Ward and Holmstrom heard defendant arguing with Swensen; according to Holmstrom, the arguing went on for 20 to 25 minutes. Eventually, Swensen went up the hill to the site of his tent. Defendant shouted at Ward through his tent, “ ‘Fat boy get up.’ ” He told Ward that Swensen had called him a “fag,” so he was going to “burn him, burn him up.” Ward testified he tried to dissuade defendant without success. He first reported to the police that defendant was going to “light Swensen’s tent on fire.” He saw defendant pour some gasoline into a bucket and run up the hill. Again Ward pleaded, “ ‘Don’t do this,’ ” but defendant responded, “ ‘You’re either with me or you’re against me.’ ”