P v. VICENTE
Filed 4/21/06
CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION EIGHT
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. VICENTE SANCHEZ, Defendant and Appellant. | B180113 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. KA065072) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Charles Horan, Judge. Affirmed.
Eric R. Larson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Jaime L. Fuster, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, and Corey J. Robins, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
_________________________________
INTRODUCTION
Appellant Vicente Sanchez challenges his second degree murder and related convictions on the ground that exclusion of defense evidence of voluntary intoxication under authority of Penal Code section 22[1] violated due process, equal protection, and the express terms of the statute. He further contends that admission of 911 calls made by persons who did not testify at trial violated his confrontation rights. We conclude that exclusion of appellant's proffered voluntary intoxication evidence did not violate due process, equal protection, or the terms of section 22. Further, the admission of tapes and transcripts of eyewitnesses' 911 calls did not violate appellant's confrontation rights, as the callers' statements were not testimonial in nature.
BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
A white Eagle Talon driven by appellant collided with a Ford Explorer driven by Brenda Casillas at the junction of the 60 and 71 Freeways. The Explorer overturned. Casillas was killed, and her two passengers, Ludivina Caro and Ofelia Llamas, were ejected from the vehicle and seriously injured. Witnesses described appellant's car as driving at high speed up to 120 miles per hour, passing other cars by driving on the shoulder, making a rapid lane change across several lanes of traffic, and striking the rear of Casillas's vehicle. Appellant fled the scene, and later called the police from a gas station about two miles from the scene of the accident. He admitted colliding with Casillas's vehicle, but claimed he was cut off by another car. The accident occurred at about 8:30 p.m. At 10:37 p.m., appellant's blood alcohol level measured 0.14 percent.
A jury convicted appellant of second degree murder; gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated; driving under the influence, causing injury; driving with a 0.08 percent or greater blood alcohol level, causing injury; and leaving the scene of an accident. The jury found appellant fled the scene of an accident and personally inflicted great bodily injury upon the three victims. The court sentenced appellant to prison for 19 years to life.
DISCUSSION
1. Exclusion of appellant's proffered voluntary intoxication evidence did not violate due process.
Defense counsel informed the trial court he intended to call an expert witness to testify regarding the physiological effects of alcohol in order to establish â€
