legal news


Register | Forgot Password

PEOPLE v. BRADY PART-I

PEOPLE v. BRADY PART-I
08:19:2010



_






PEOPLE v. BRADY





















Filed 8/9/10

















IN THE SUPREME
COURT OF
CALIFORNIA







THE PEOPLE, )

)

Plaintiff
and Respondent, )

) S078404

v. )

)

ROGER HOAN BRADY, )

) Los
Angeles County

Defendant
and Appellant. ) Super. Ct.
No. YA020910

__________________________________ )



A jury convicted defendant Roger Hoan Brady of the first degree
murder of Officer Martin Ganz of the Manhattan Beach Police Department. (Pen. Code, §§ 187, subd. (a), 189.)[1] It found true special
circumstance allegations that the murder was committed against a peace officer
engaged in the performance of his duties (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(7)) and for
the purpose of avoiding or preventing a lawful arrest (id., subd. (a)(5)); it also found true a special circumstance
allegation that defendant had previously been convicted of murder (id., subd. (a)(2)). The jury
further found that defendant had personally used a firearm in the commission of
the offense. (§ 12022.5,
subd. (a).) The
jury returned a verdict of death. The trial
court denied the automatic application to modify the verdict (§ 190.4,
subd. (e)) and sentenced defendant to death.

This appeal is
automatic. (§ 1239, subd.
(b).) We affirm the judgment.

DISCUSSION >

I. Guilt Phase


A. Facts


1. Prosecution Evidence



On the evening of December 27, 1993, Officer Martin Ganz of the
Manhattan Beach Police Department was on patrol duty in a marked police
vehicle. He was wearing his patrol
uniform, which was dark blue or black, and a badge. Ganz's 12-year-old nephew, Don Ganz (Don),[2]
accompanied him on a department sanctioned â€




Description A jury convicted defendant Roger Hoan Brady of the first degree murder of Officer Martin Ganz of the Manhattan Beach Police Department. (Pen. Code, §§ 187, subd. (a), 189.)[1] It found true special circumstance allegations that the murder was committed against a peace officer engaged in the performance of his duties (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(7)) and for the purpose of avoiding or preventing a lawful arrest (id., subd. (a)(5)); it also found true a special circumstance allegation that defendant had previously been convicted of murder (id., subd. (a)(2)). The jury further found that defendant had personally used a firearm in the commission of the offense. (§ 12022.5, subd. (a).) The jury returned a verdict of death. The trial court denied the automatic application to modify the verdict (§ 190.4, subd. (e)) and sentenced defendant to death.
This appeal is automatic. (§ 1239, subd. (b).) Court affirm the judgment.
Rating
0/5 based on 0 votes.

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2024 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2024 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale