The three-justice panel from California’s 2nd District Court of Appeal rejected the defense’s contention that the jury which heard the case against Jeffrey Cole Brooks should not have seen two photographs of the 21-year-old victim, Daniel Eduardo Orellana, at the crash scene and during an autopsy in light of videos it was shown of the crash scene and the victim’s vehicle in flames.
In a 19-page ruling, the appellate court justices found that the photographs were “unpleasant but not unduly gruesome for a murder case of this kind.”
“Further, the evidence of defendant’s extreme intoxication, his acknowledgment he was drunk and should not have been driving, his prior conviction for alcohol-related reckless driving, his court-ordered education, his friend’s warning and attempt to prevent him from driving, and the severity of the fatal collision forcefully established his guilt. There is no chance the two photographs at issue inflamed the jury and swayed it to convict,” the panel ruled.
The justices also turned down the defense’s claim that jurors should have heard about Brooks’ statement to a sheriff’s deputy about 25 minutes after arriving at a hospital that he “didn’t remember what he was doing” and that he “intended to make a phone call” to his mother, noting again that there was “no chance” of a more favorable verdict if jurors had heard that evidence.
Brooks is serving a 15-year-to-life term in connection with the Sept. 26, 2014, crash, for which he was convicted of second-degree murder.
Orellana’s vehicle was stopped at a red light at Avenue S and Sierra Highway while he was on his way home from work.
The impact of the crash caused Orellana’s car to burst into flames and spin across the intersection, according to Deputy District Attorney Daniel Rochmes.
Brooks — who had taken a “party bus” to Los Angeles — had been warned by a friend that he was too drunk to drive, but got into the driver’s seat of his 2005 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution and left the Park and Ride lot on Avenue S in Palmdale, Rochmes said after the verdict.
Authorities determined that he was driving no less than 88.9 miles per hour with a blood-alcohol level of at least 0.27 percent.
Brooks was on probation in San Diego County for alcohol-related reckless driving at the time of the crash and had attended court-ordered DUI education classes that warned about the dangers of driving under the influence, Rochmes said.
Previous related stories:
Man convicted of murder for fatal DUI crash in Palmdale
Man charged with murder for fiery crash, victim’s family pleads for justice
ANNON says
WTF is the defense thinking…. Brooks killed someone. he needs to own it!
Justice was served says
He deserves this sentence!!!! Im glad hes put away and unable to harm anyone for the moment
Tom says
Everyone makes mistakes, but in this case it was a bad judgement call. So i say blow up those two pictures seen at the court case and when he has a year left in prison hang them on the only two open walls in his cell so when he looks left and right he will remember to make better choices when he gets out.
JurrorThatConvicted says
I was a jurror on this case and I can assure you that none of those pictures swayed my mind. We took everything into account when convicting Mr. Brooks as fairly as possible. Two mothers lost their sons, one mother can still see hers and he has a chance at rehabilitation. The other mother will only have memories of her son. His sentence of 25-life is appropriate.
Tim Scott says
The article says 15 to life.
J says
Glad to hear this idiot will be put away where he cannot hurt anybody again…Hope they never let him out!There is no excuse for what he did other then stupidity!
Laughing says
The culprit has not learned his lesson yet. Watch out when he gets out.
Tim Scott says
Well, he has the rest of a 15 to life bit. We can still hope he figures it out under the rehabilitative tutoring of the California Department of Corrections.
Oh.
Wait.
That may not be something they consider a priority.