California v. Johnson

In 2014, Lamar Canady was shot to death in broad daylight in the Oak Park neighborhood of San Diego. After months of investigation by police, with the assistance of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and authorities in Kansas City, Missouri, defendants Peter Johnson and Ian Guthrie were arrested and eventually charged with murder (count 1) and assault with a semiautomatic firearm (count 2) for Canady's death. The information also alleged that Johnson intentionally and personally discharged a firearm during the commission of the murder, causing death, and that he had a strike prior and serious felony prior stemming from a 1998 murder conviction in Jamaica. The information alleged Guthrie had a strike prior and serious felony prior stemming from a 1997 manslaughter conviction in New York. The investigation into Canady's death revealed Johnson and Guthrie were participants in a conspiracy to kill Canady led by drug kingpin Omar Grant. After a joint trial but with separate juries, Johnson and Guthrie were both convicted of first degree murder. Johnson's jury also found true the allegation that Johnson personally discharged a firearm resulting in Canady's death. Johnson and Guthrie appealed their convictions on various grounds. Guthrie asserted: (1) the trial court erred by denying his motion to suppress statements made to police after he invoked his right to counsel during his postarrest interview; (2) insufficient evidence supported the prosecution's theory that he aided and abetted Canady's murder; (3) the trial court abused its discretion by admitting into evidence a rap song recorded by Canady prior to his death; (4) that even if the errors individually do not require reversal, cumulatively they do; and (5) that the trial court abused its discretion by denying the defendants' motion to continue the sentencing hearing to allow additional discovery concerning police use of a cell site simulator to locate him. Johnson asserted the trial court erred by failing to instruct on the lesser included offenses of second degree murder and voluntary manslaughter, and that the use of his Jamaican conviction as a prior strike and prior serious felony ran afoul of his right to equal protection under the California and United States Constitutions. Both men also contended the trial court abused its discretion by admitting into evidence testimony and documents concerning their illegal entry into the United States. The Court of Appeal concluded these claims lacked merit, and accordingly affirmed both men's convictions. View "California v. Johnson" on Justia Law