State of California v. Alejandro Prado

Visalia, California criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with murder.

This case involved a shooting incident between two vehicles traveling northbound on Highway 65 between Porterville and Lindsay at approximately 12:45 a.m. on November 23, 1997. In the victim's vehicle, the driver, Joseph A.,was uninjured. His right front passenger, Celeste M., sustained minor burn-type injuries. Rear passengers

Shalisa H. and Ray P. sustained gunshot wounds but survived. Rear passenger Marlene Romero was fatally shot in the head.



CRIMINAL LAW. RESENTENCING PETITION. The case examines a resentencing petition filed under section 1172.6 of the California Penal Code, where the petitioner challenged his convictions for attempted murder and sought relief under changes brought by Senate Bill No. 1437.



CRIMINAL LAW. ATTEMPTED MURDER. The court addressed whether substantial evidence supported the defendant's multiple attempted murder convictions, given that the petitioner argued he fired only a single shot and others relied on a kill zone theory for liability.



CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. HEARSAY EVIDENCE. The issue arose over the admissibility of hearsay evidence regarding statements made by a co-defendant, with the court affirming that such evidence was admissible under section 1172.6, subdivision (d)(3), due to the co-defendant's availability for cross-examination.



EVIDENCE LAW. KILL ZONE LIABILITY. Analysis was provided on the applicability of the kill zone theory, particularly in determining if the defendant had a concurrent intent to kill multiple victims by creating a zone of fatal harm.

Key Phrases First degree murder. Attempted murder. Resentencing petition. Specific intent to kill. Kill zone theory.

Affirmed