P. v. Richards

Filed 7/27/06 P. v. Richards CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tuolumne County. Eleanor Provost, Judge.

Athena Shudde, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Mary Jo Graves, Assistant Attorney General, Stephen G. Herndon and Peter W. Thompson, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

-ooOoo-

Procedural and Factual HistorIES

Appellant Steven Albert Richards was convicted by jury of the first degree murder of his sister Nadine (Pen. Code,^[1] § 187, subd. (a)), and the arson of his family home (§ 451, subd. (b)). In a bifurcated proceeding, appellant was found legally sane at the time he committed the offenses. Appellant was sentenced to the aggregate term of 33 years to life: 25 years to life on the murder, plus a consecutive upper term of eight years on the arson.

The facts of the case are tragic. Appellant has long suffered from mental illness, paranoid schizophrenia, and a low IQ. He had been hospitalized on numerous occasions. As a result, this 49-year-old man lived at home with his parents and his physically disabled sister, Nadine. Appellant suffered from delusions and hallucinations. He was heavily medicated. In the months preceding the fire, appellant's mental health deteriorated. He and Nadine's relationship became hostile. He believed that Nadine was trying to poison him, that she was intentionally destroying his possessions, and that she had a gun and was going to kill him. He believed that she was putting hair growth powder in his underwear, on his face, and in his weight gain drink.

On the morning of January 9, 2003, appellant went to the garage and poured gasoline into a coffee can. He walked into the kitchen area of the home where his sister was sitting reading a newspaper. His mother was standing nearby. Appellant poured the gasoline on Nadine and lit a match. Nadine was consumed in fire immediately. Ultimately the house was engulfed. Nadine and the family dog both died. Appellant's mother escaped injury. After igniting the fire, appellant left the house and started walking. He was picked up by sheriff's officers responding to the fire and was ultimately arrested after admitting he had set the fire and intended to kill Nadine. Appellant's actual words were, â€