People v. Carter CA3

Filed 7/11/14 P. v. Carter CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Sacramento)

THE PEOPLE, C073126

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 10F07391)

v.

NATHANIEL JAMES CARTER,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant was convicted of first degree murder with the special circumstance that the murder was committed while engaged in the crime of robbery. The jury found true the allegations that defendant committed the murder while armed with a firearm, and that he personally used and discharged the firearm causing death. Defendant was also convicted of attempted robbery, and the jury found that in the commission of that crime he was armed with a firearm and that he discharged the firearm causing death. The trial court sentenced defendant to life without the possibility of parole. Defendant argues the trial court erred in admitting evidence that two of the eyewitnesses had been threatened. We disagree and shall affirm the judgment.

1

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND A detailed recitation of the facts is unnecessary in light of the issues on appeal. The victim, Steven Carmassi, was a grower, processor, and distributor of marijuana. He was robbed and killed in the parking lot of a supermarket by defendant and Latice Collins, who were driven to the scene of the crime by Collins’s girlfriend, Dejohng Taylor. Defendant and Collins enlisted the aid of 16-year-old D.H. in the planned robbery. She agreed to distract Carmassi while defendant and Collins ambushed him. However, D.H. was a friend of Carmassi’s, and she and her 15-year-old friend Kayla T. agreed between themselves to warn Carmassi. Before D.H. and Kayla T. could reach Carmassi, they saw defendant and Collins accost him as he sat in his truck, heard gunshots, and watched Carmassi drive his truck away, eventually crashing into several automobiles and a building. Carmassi died of a gunshot wound. It was stipulated that there were no fingerprints or DNA evidence linking defendant to the crime scene. Both D.H. and Kayla T. testified at trial. They were afraid to testify because they had received threats. DISCUSSION Defendant argues the trial court erred in admitting evidence that D.H. and Kayla T. had been threatened because such evidence was inadmissible and prejudicial. With respect to the threat D.H. saw on Facebook, defendant argues the evidence was not properly authenticated. A. The Evidence of Witness Threats was Admissible Defendant argues the evidence of threats to the witnesses was inadmissible because it was irrelevant and because it was hearsay. Defendant’s argument that such evidence is not relevant unless the witnesses’ testimony was affected by the threat, or the testimony favored the defendant, is contrary