People v. Howell CA3

Filed 7/31/23 P. v. Howell CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, C096275

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 20FE020091)

v.

CHARLES CONLEY HOWELL,

Defendant and Appellant.

A jury found defendant Charles Conley Howell guilty of gross vehicular manslaughter and, in a bifurcated trial, found true that defendant had three prior convictions. The jury further found true various factors in aggravation. The trial court dismissed the three prior serious felony enhancements under Penal Code1 section 1385 and sentenced defendant to 25 years to life. Defendant appeals.

1 Undesignated section references are to the Penal Code.

1

Defendant raises two primary contentions on appeal. First, defendant argues the trial court violated his due process rights and Evidence Code sections 350 and 352 by allowing the prosecution to use his refusal to submit to a warrantless blood draw as evidence of his guilt. Second, defendant argues the trial court violated his federal due process, Sixth Amendment, and Fourteenth Amendment rights, and Penal Code section 1111 because it failed to give an accomplice instruction for a witness. Defendant further argues the cumulative prejudicial effect of the foregoing errors deprived him of a fair trial. Finding no merit in these contentions, we affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Ricardo C. was in the car with Santiago D., who was driving, when defendant drove through a red light at an intersection at approximately 50 to 60 miles per hour and struck their car in cross-traffic.2 Four witnesses testified regarding their observations of and experiences relating to the collision. Defendant struck Santiago’s car on the driver’s side, broadsiding it, and pushing it up against a pole. Santiago died from his injuries. Ricardo suffered broken ribs and stayed in the hospital for four to five days under observation. Defendant was transported to the hospital but suffered minor injuries. Prior to the collision, Rayshon P. observed defendant “[q]uickly” coming up from behind him at an intersection located before the intersection where the collision occurred. Defendant pulled up alongside Rayshon and revved his engine. Rayshon took this to mean that defendant wanted to race him. Rayshon and defendant engaged in a speed contest for approximately 10 to 20 seconds, “driving side-by-side, going over 55 miles an hour.” The speed contest started approximately a quarter mile back from the intersection where the collision occurred. After defendant cut Rayshon off by moving into his lane,