2007-0M-036 State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Arturo
Montano Martinez, Appellant.
DESCRIPTION OF CRIME: On December 2, 2000, Montano Martinez was standing outside
near Lake Street and Portland Avenue in Minneapolis with members of the Latin
Kings gang. A car with members of the rival 18th Streeters gang,
including the victim, Ernesto Ayala, approached the group. Shots were
fired from the car and two Latin Kings members were wounded. Montano
Martinez assisted one of the victims into a vehicle and accompanied him to the
hospital.
After leaving the hospital, Montano Martinez went to the home of
Roberto Lopez-Rios, where a group of Latin Kings members were hanging out with
members of a separate gang, the Sureños 13. According to Vargas, at some
point he, Montano Martinez, Lopez-Rios, and two Sureños 13 gang members set out
to find 18th Streeters to shoot in retaliation for the earlier shooting.
The plan was for either Vargas or Lopez-Rios to do the shooting. Just
before the shooting, Lopez-Rios attempted to hand Vargas a gun but dropped it
on the floor between Montano Martinez’s legs. Montano Martinez then
picked it up, got out of the vehicle by crawling over Vargas, and shot Ayala to
death.
Montano Martinez fled to Mexico, but turned himself in to
authorities in California in April 2004. Two Minneapolis detectives
interviewed Montano Martinez while he was in custody in California and recorded
a statement in which Montano Martinez admitted killing Ayala.
In that statement, Montano Martinez indicated that on the night of
the shooting the group in the car went to the scene of the shooting to retaliate
against 18th Streeters gang members for the earlier shooting. He also
indicated that the plan was for either Vargas or Lopez-Rios to be the shooter,
but when Lopez-Rios dropped the gun, Montano Martinez picked it up, exited the
vehicle, and shot Ayala. When the detectives asked Montano Martinez why
he and the others in the vehicle went searching for the 18th Streeters, he
responded, “[I]t was just some stupid stuff with gangs.”
THE TRIAL: Montano Martinez testified in his own defense. He
testified that he was a member of the Latin Kings gang and had been a member
for approximately six months before shooting Ayala. He further testified
that the Latin Kings commit crimes of violence, including drive-by shootings
and murders. When asked about the role of retaliation and respect, he
testified that when an enemy of the Latin Kings “disrespects” a King,
“something” has to be done and that “[something] is harm.” With respect
to the night of the Ayala shooting, Montano Martinez testified that he remembered
very little because he had been drinking heavily and had smoked crack and
marijuana.
In his testimony, Montano Martinez admitted getting into the
vehicle with Lopez-Rios, Vargas, and two others, but denied knowing about a
plan to retaliate against the 18th Streeters. Montano Martinez explained
that he was not aware of what was going on because he was intoxicated and under
the influence of drugs. Montano Martinez testified that he fell asleep in
the car, but awoke when they encountered the 18th Streeters because he felt a
gun fall into his lap. According to Montano Martinez, he picked up the
gun and crawled out of the vehicle and then, out of fear, shot at Ayala.
There was also testimony that Montana Martinez told other people
that he was involved in Ayala’s shooting. Bryanna Redbird, who was with
Montano Martinez when the 18th Streeters gang members carried out their
shooting, testified that after the Ayala shooting Montano Martinez told her
that “they went and blasted them fools.” Armando Jaramillo testified that
Montano Martinez admitted to him that he shot at the 18th Streeters gang
members.
On December 14, 2004, a Hennepin County jury found appellant
Arturo Montano Martinez guilty of four counts of first-degree murder.
The trial court sentenced Montano Martinez to life imprisonment on count
one—first-degree premeditated murder, and a 24-month consecutive sentence on
count two—first-degree premeditated murder committed for the benefit of a gang.
THIS APPEAL: On this direct appeal, the Minnesota Supreme Court rejected
Martinez’ first two claims: (1) whether the admission of accomplice
Francisco Vargas’s testimony from the trial of another accomplice was error;
and ((2) whether the admission of certain gang expert testimony was error.
For the reasons discussed below, the Supreme Court affirmed
Montano Martinez’s conviction, but vacate his sentence and remand for
resentencing consistent with this opinion.
Justice Gildea joined the unanimous decision by Justice Alan Page
which upheld Martinez’ convictions and revised his sentence.
First, the Minnesota Supreme Court rejected Martinez’ claim that the
admission of accomplice Francisco Vargas’s testimony from the trial of another
accomplice was error.
there is no confrontation problem, nor is there any doubt about
whether Vargas made the statement or what it contained. Before Vargas’s
testimony from the Lopez-Rios trial was admitted into evidence, Vargas admitted
giving the testimony and indicated that he told the truth at the time that he gave
it. Moreover, because Vargas admitted giving the testimony, there is no
dispute over whether he made the statement or what it contained. Finally,
it should be noted that Vargas ultimately testified at Montano Martinez’s trial
and was subject to cross-examination. While Vargas was a reluctant
witness, his testimony was largely consistent with his testimony from the
Lopez-Rios trial.
Also, as in Ortlepp, there was a significant amount of
evidence introduced at trial pointing towards Montano Martinez’s guilt.
That evidence included Montano Martinez’s trial testimony and his
self-incriminating statement to the police, both of which corroborate much of
Vargas’s testimony from the Lopez-Rios trial and point toward finding Montano
Martinez guilty. The state also introduced testimony from Redbird and
Jaramillo indicating that Montano Martinez had told them that he was involved
in Ayala’s murder.
Based on the totality of the circumstances, we conclude that
Vargas’s statements from the Lopez-Rios trial are sufficiently trustworthy and
were admissible as substantive evidence under Rule 803(24). Therefore,
the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it admitted them.
Second, the Minnesota Supreme Court rejected Martinez’ claim that the
admission of certain gang expert testimony was error.
We have considered the admissibility of gang expert testimony in
four recent cases: State v. In each case, there was ample
independent evidence linking the defendant to the gang and supporting a
conclusion of guilt as to the crime charged. In each case, we concluded
that the expert corroborated the testimony of numerous witnesses and likely was
no more influential than much of the other evidence presented linking the
defendant to the crime. And, in each of those cases, we concluded that
reversal was not warranted because the error did not affect substantial
rights.
Third, the Minnesota Supreme Court accepted Martinez’ claim that Montano
Martinez’s sentence was unlawful.
Montano Martinez was sentenced to life in prison on count one,
first-degree premeditated murder, and a consecutive sentence of 24 months in
prison on count two—first-degree premeditated murder committed for the benefit
of a gang. Montano Martinez argues, and the state agrees, that the court erred
when it imposed Montano Martinez’s sentence in that manner. They are
correct.
As we said in State v. LaTourelle, 343 N.W.2d 277, 284
(Minn. 1984): “[T]he proper procedure to be followed by the trial court when
the defendant is convicted on more than one charge for the same act is for the
court to adjudicate formally and impose sentence on one count only.”
(Emphasis added.)
Here, Montano Martinez was found guilty on four counts and the
court adjudicated formally and imposed sentences on counts one and two.
Therefore, we vacate Montano Martinez’s sentences and remand to the trial court
for resentencing.
Page (Russell Anderson, Paul
Anderson, Hanson, Meyer, Barry Anderson, and Gildea)
DATE OF DECISION: January 11, 2007
RECORD NUMBER: 2007-011
DESCRIPTION: [MURDER]
No comments:
Post a Comment