P. v. Childress
Defendants and appellants Joel Vincent Childress (Childress), Kelsie James Palmer (Palmer), and Eric Gerare Allen (Allen) (collectively defendants) appeal their convictions of murder, attempted murder, and making a criminal threat. Childress contends that substantial evidence does not support his murder or attempted murder convictions, the finding of premeditation and deliberation, or the gang and multiple-murder special circumstances. Palmer and Allen contend that the trial court erred in refusing to sever the murder charge against Childress in count 1 from the remaining charges. Palmer asserts Aranda-Bruton and Crawford error[1] in the admission of a recording of Allen’s interview with detectives; and all defendants assert several instructional errors and join in the arguments of the other defendant to the extent such arguments might apply to their benefit. Allen contends that his 107 years to life sentence was cruel and unusual under the federal constitution. We reject Allen’s constitutional claim but modify his sentence to comply with statutory requirements, and reject defendants’ other contentions and affirm the judgments.
Comments on P. v. Childress