P. v. DeWitt
Filed 8/8/13 P. v. DeWitt
CA3
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 This opinion has not been certified for
publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff
and Respondent,
v.
DARRELL ALVIN DEWITT,
Defendant
and Appellant.
C072595
(Super.
Ct. No. 11F06533)
us pursuant to
v. Wende
(1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) and
People
v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110 (Kelly). Having reviewed the
record as required by W
of judgment, which we will order corrected.
The judgment is affirmed.
We provide the following brief
description of the facts and procedural history of the case. (K
40 Cal.4th at p. 124.)
Nineteen-year-old defendant Darrell
Alvin DeWitt lived in an Elk Grove apartment with his father, Darrell Andre
DeWitt (Darrell) and his 18-year-old brother Andre DeWitt (Andre). Darrell, who suffered from congestive heart
failure, spent much of the time in his bedroom.
Darrell and defendant constantly argued because Darrell wanted defendant
to get a job and help around the apartment.
Defendant once told his uncle he hated Darrell and wanted to kill
him.
On the morning of September
19, 2011,
defendant and Darrell got into an argument that culminated in Darrell asking
defendant to move out for a week. At
around noon, defendant gave Andre $40 and told him to walk to a nearby Metro PCS
store to make a payment on their shared cell phone account.
After Andre left, defendant carried
a double-headed battle axe from his room to Darrell’s room and hit Darrell on
the top of the head. Defendant continued
the attack, striking Darrell several times on the head, neck and body with the
battle axe. When he was done, defendant
wrapped up the bloody axe, closed the door, and left the room.
At 12:30 p.m., defendant ran into
his friend Chase Hunt about a quarter of a mile from the apartment. Defendant, who was jumping and skipping
around, told Hunt he was happy.
Defendant later returned to the apartment with Hunt, and by mid-evening,
defendant, Andre, Hunt, and two other friends sat around the apartment drinking
vodka. Defendant ended the party when
the two other friends did not share their orange juice mixer.
When Andre woke up the following
morning, defendant suggested they walk to Denny’s for breakfast. When they returned from breakfast, they
shared some alcohol with Hunt and two other young men. After playing video games for several hours,
Andre realized he had not seen Darrell since the previous day. He asked defendant what happened, and
defendant said he had killed him.
Andre was in shock and
disbelief. He opened the door to Darrell’s
room, where he found blood on the wall and Darrell’s body draped with covers in
the corner with his feet sticking out from a comforter that covered most of his
body. Andre left the apartment on foot,
saying he was going to a friend’s house.
Defendant followed close behind him saying, “Don’t tell anybody.†Andre immediately called 911.
Darrell died of chop wounds to the
head and chest. A double-headed battle
axe wrapped in a bathrobe was found stuffed in a dresser drawer in defendant’s
bedroom.
Defendant waived a jury trial. Following the four-day court trial, defendant
was convicted of first degree murder with a dangerous weapon enhancement. (Pen.
Code, § 187, subd. (a), former § 12022, subd. (b)(1).) The trial court sentenced defendant to 25
years to life plus one year, imposed various fines and fees, and awarded 421
days of presentence custody credit. (P
Defendant appeals.
We appointed
to represent
defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an
opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this court to
review the record and determine whether there are any
issues
on appeal. (Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.)
Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental
brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days have elapsed, and we have
received no communication from defendant.
Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no
arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to
defendant.
We note two errors in the abstract
of judgment: (1) The abstract indicates defendant was
convicted by a jury; this is incorrect.
As noted, defendant waived a jury trial and was convicted following a
court trial. (2) The year the crime was
committed is shown as “2012â€â€”this should be “2011.†We will order the abstract of judgment
corrected at item 1 in these respects.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed. The trial court is directed to prepare a
corrected abstract of judgment in accordance with this opinion and forward a
certified copy of the corrected abstract to the
of Corrections and Rehabilitation.
BUTZ , Acting P. J.
We
concur:
MAURO , J.
MURRAY , J.
