Case Title: State v. Perez

Citation: 383 P.2d 745, 94 Ariz. 290

Docket Number: 

State: arizona

Court: Arizona Supreme Court

Date: 1963-07-03T00:00:00Z

Document:
94 Ariz. 290 (1963) 383 P.2d 745 The STATE of Arizona, Appellee, v. Blas PEREZ, Appellant. No. 1248. Supreme Court of Arizona, In Division. July 3, 1963. Rehearing Denied September 17, 1963. *291 Gibson & Gibson, Phoenix, for appellant. Robert W. Pickrell, Atty. Gen., Stirley Newell, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Charles N. Ronan, County Atty. of Maricopa County, for appellee. STRUCKMEYER, Justice. Blas Perez was convicted of manslaughter in the death of one Luis Lopez. He appeals from the verdict, the judgment, and from the lower court's denial of his motion for new trial. His co-defendant, Tony Zamora, was convicted of second degree murder. Appellant's assignments of error present but one question. Was there sufficient evidence introduced at the trial to support a conviction of the manslaughter charge? It is the cardinal rule that on an appeal from a criminal conviction we must take the evidence in a light most favorable to the state and resolve all conflicts in the evidence in favor of upholding the jury's verdict. State v. Izzo, 94 Ariz. 226, 383 P.2d 116; State v. Rivera, 94 Ariz. 45, 381 P.2d 584; State v. Milton, 85 Ariz. 69, 331 P.2d 846. The evidence viewed as the jury could have found it supports these facts: On June 25, 1961, appellant Perez, Tony Zamora, Pablo Madril, and Alex Ortega went to the Truck Stop Tavern in Guadalupe, Arizona. Prior to entering the tavern they were seen together in an automobile by one Ambrosio Lopez, Sr., brother of the deceased, Luis Lopez. He testified in part: The boys entered the tavern together. Ambrosio Lopez, Jr., an eyewitness to much of the incident, testified: *292 After they entered the tavern, they asked a bartender, one Daniel Maldonado, to open a quart of beer for them. He refused believing that they were minors. Tony Zamora, co-defendant of Perez, then commenced the disturbance out of which the homicide occurred by pulling a knife and making threatening gestures and statements to Maldonado. The young men refused to leave voluntarily and were forced out. Maldonado testified: Zamora's testimony corroborates the fact that they were involuntarily put out of the tavern: The testimony of Ambrosio Lopez, Jr. and Ambrosio Lopez, Sr. develop what happened. Ambrosio, Jr. testified: Ambrosio Lopez, Sr. testified: From this testimony the jury was justified in believing that from the time of the unlawful attempt to gain service in the tavern the juveniles acted in concert in a breach of the peace and in continuing to act in concert carried out the brutal and deadly assault on Luis Lopez. The jury could have believed that Perez, although not physically participating in the action at the moment the fatal wounds were inflicted, saw the knife passed to Zamora, saw the stabbing and instead of withdrawing in an attempt to disassociate himself from the consequence continued his participation in the breach of peace he had concurred in from its inception inside the building. The argument advanced by appellant that the evidence is insufficient to convict him as a principal in the homicide has no merit. A.R.S. § 13-139 defines principals: We said in State v. Roberts: It is clear from the facts that the jury could have found active participation in the commission of the homicide. Perez was charged and tried as a principal for the crime of second degree murder. The jury had submitted to it six forms of verdict, two of guilty of second degree murder, two of guilty of voluntary manslaughter, two of not guilty, in each instance one verdict for each defendant. It found Perez guilty of the lesser included offense of voluntary manslaughter, when the facts would have supported a conviction of second degree murder. Such is solely within the prerogative of the jury. State v. Parsons, 70 Ariz. 399, 222 P.2d 637; Mapula v. Territory, 9 Ariz. 199, 80 P. 389; Rule 295, Rules of Criminal Procedure, 17 A.R.S. The judgment is affirmed. BERNSTEIN, C.J., and JENNINGS, J., concur.