People v. Castillo CA2/6

Filed 8/9/16 P. v. Castillo CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

THE PEOPLE, 2d Crim. No. B263820 (Super. Ct. No. 1448623) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Santa Barbara County)

v.

DANIEL GARCIA CASTILLO,

Defendant and Appellant.

Daniel Garcia Castillo appeals judgment after conviction by jury of two counts of gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, with injury to more than one victim (Pen. Code, § 191.5, subd. (a); Veh. Code,1 § 23558); one count of driving under the influence of a drug causing injury, with personal infliction of great bodily injury and injury to more than one victim (§§ 23153, subd. (e), 23558; Pen. Code, § 12022.7, subd. (a)); and one count of reckless driving with an enumerated injury (§ 23105). The trial court sentenced Castillo to 10 years 8 months in prison, a significant portion of which is attributable to the jury’s findings that he was under the influence of methamphetamine and acted with gross negligence. He contends there is no substantial evidence to support those findings and all but the reckless driving conviction should be reversed. We affirm.

1 All statutory references are to the Vehicle Code unless otherwise stated.

BACKGROUND Castillo drove a forklift home from work in reverse at maximum speed. A witness saw him turn from Stowell Road onto Philbric Road at an “unsafe speed,” “going pretty erratic,” “[s]werving,” and “crossing over” Philbric’s “center divider.” The witness “debat[ed] whether [to] call the police.” The Pozos family was traveling north on Philbric, within the speed limit and within their lane. Castillo saw their car coming but crossed over the double line, still in reverse, and accelerated left across their path. His 12,000 pound forklift hit their 3,000 pound car, killing two family members and injuring two others. A blood test established that Castillo had 110 nanograms per milliliter of methamphetamine in his system. Prosecution and defense experts disagreed whether it impaired his ability to drive. They agreed that, unlike alcohol levels, the level of methamphetamine in a person’s blood does not correlate to a particular level of impairment. The effects vary with the method of ingestion and the individual’s tolerance. They agreed methamphetamine can remain in the blood stream after its effects wear off. A California Highway Patrol (CHP) officer arrived about 10 minutes after the collision, and saw Castillo pacing, drinking from a water bottle, and smoking heavily. Castillo’s hands were shaking and he touched his face repeatedly. His eyes were red and watery, but he was not crying. Castillo told the officer he smoked marijuana one week earlier, used methamphetamine the day before, and drank a beer and took a Vicodin that morning. His blood alcohol level was below the legal limit. Two hours after the collision, a drug recognition evaluator examined Castillo. He concluded Castillo was too impaired to drive based on Castillo’s statements, his vital signs, other symptoms, and his performance on field sobriety tests. He believed Castillo was under the influence of a central nervous system stimulant (such as methamphetamine), a narcotic analgesic (Vicodin), and cannabis. Lab results later showed there were no detectable levels of narcotic analgesics or cannabis in his system.