People v. Frazier CA3

Filed 8/11/22 P. v. Frazier CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, C095087

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 15F01458)

v.

LUTHER DEVON FRAZIER,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appointed counsel for defendant Luther Devon Frazier asked this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant filed a supplemental brief. Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to the defendant, we will affirm the judgment. I. BACKGROUND We take the facts from our prior decision. (People v. Frazier (Feb. 23, 2021, C082028) [nonpub. opn.] (Frazier).) Defendant killed his heroin supplier. A postal carrier saw defendant, armed with a revolver, arguing with another person. The other person walked away and defendant

1

followed. After the two men went between some buildings, the postal carrier heard gunshots and then saw defendant walk out. (Frazier, supra, C088702.) The victim was shot six times at close range, including once in the back. (Frazier, supra, C088702.) Defendant later told a friend he killed someone. (Frazier, supra, C088702.) Defendant lived at his parents’ home. His father discovered a revolver he kept at the house was missing. That gun was never found. (Frazier, supra,C088702.) In a videotaped interview with the police played for the jury, defendant claimed acquaintances must have stolen his father’s gun. Defendant first denied being at the scene but then admitted going to the victim to beat him up because the victim had threatened his family. Defendant said his companion shot the victim. (Frazier, supra, C088702.) At trial, defendant disavowed his police interview statement admitting he “ ‘lied through [his] teeth’ ” to protect his family. Defendant testified the victim had engaged in a campaign of extortion and intimidation to gain use of defendant’s car and made a series of threats to defendant’s family. Defendant claimed the victim said he was a gang member and warned defendant that if he went to the police, his gang would kill defendant’s parents. Defendant testified he shot the victim in self-defense after the victim pulled out his gun. (Frazier, supra, C088702.) The jury convicted defendant of murder (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a))1, and found true the enhancement defendant used a firearm during the murder (§ 12022.53, subd. (d)). The trial court sentenced him to 50 years to life in prison. Defendant appealed raising issues about his post-trial Marsden2 motion, and the trial court’s refusal to appoint new counsel. (Frazier, supra, C088702.) This court