Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Christopher Henriquez - California Death Row

  1. #1
    Guest
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,534

    Christopher Henriquez - California Death Row




    Facts of the Crime:

    Christopher Henriquez held up a bank, and was afraid that his wife Carmen would inform on him. So he decided to eliminate her as a witness permanently. On August 12, 1996, Henriquez strangled Carmen to death, and then bludgeoned his three-year-old daughter Zuri to death with a claw hammer. Carmen was just four weeks away from delivering a healthy baby. In 2000, Henriquez was found guilty in Contra Costa County of two counts of first-degree murder and was sentenced to death on June 2nd of that year.

  2. #2
    Administrator Moh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    13,014
    Henriquez's case has been fully briefed on direct appeal before the California Supreme Court since May 19, 2011.

    http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.g...doc_no=S089311

  3. #3
    Administrator Moh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    13,014
    On September 6, 2017, oral argument will be heard in Henriquez's direct appeal before the California Supreme Court.

    http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/SSEP517.pdf

  4. #4
    Senior Member CnCP Legend CharlesMartel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    FRANCE
    Posts
    3,073
    Death sentence upheld for Antioch man who killed pregnant wife and daughter

    By Bob Egelko
    The San Francisco Chronicle

    The state Supreme Court upheld the death sentence Thursday of an Antioch man who killed his pregnant wife and their 2-year-old daughter in 1996, and later told his mother he did it because his wife “wouldn’t stop blabbing” about his bank robberies.

    Christopher Henriquez was 24 when he strangled his wife, Carmen, 25, who was eight months pregnant, and clubbed and choked their daughter, Zuri, in their apartment in August 1996. He admitted the killings to police.

    Henriquez had been paroled from prison in New York in July 1995 after a robbery sentence and, the court said, robbed two banks in San Francisco a month before the murders. His wife moved out that month but, according to relatives, returned to her husband after he promised not to rob another bank.

    The killings occurred a day after the couple and their child returned from a trip to Disneyland. His mother, Deborah Henriquez, who was also on the trip, testified that her son came to her house the day after they got back, looking dazed. The next day, she said, he told her that he had killed his wife and child in a fit of anger.

    His mother testified that Henriquez had told his wife that he planned to rob another bank, and she “wouldn’t stop blabbing her mouth” to her friends. She reported the conversation to police, who went to the apartment and found the bodies.

    A Contra Costa County jury convicted him of two counts of first-degree murder and returned a death verdict.

    In Thursday’s unanimous ruling, the state’s high court rejected a defense argument that the county violated Henriquez’s right to a jury drawn from a cross-section of the community because of an underrepresentation of African Americans, who made up 8.1 percent of the county population but only 4.8 percent of those reporting for jury duty at the time of his trial.

    There was no evidence of “systematic exclusion,” Justice Leondra Kruger said, citing a judge’s findings that African Americans in the county reported for jury service less often than other groups, and that the county was not to blame.

    On another issue, she said the prosecutor did not violate Henriquez’s right to a fair trial by telling the jury that one reason for a death sentence was the “vengeance” society was entitled to take for the killings. Such comments are allowable as long as they are not the main argument for the death penalty, Kruger said.

    Deputy Public Defender Oscar Bobrow, a lawyer for Henriquez, said the court had given short shrift to defense evidence that the county was responsible for racial imbalance on its juries by holding all felony trials in Martinez and none in Richmond, where most of its African American residents live. He said the defense will present that argument when it takes the case to federal court.

    The case is People vs. Henriquez, S089311.

    http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/...d-12414687.php

  5. #5
    Administrator Moh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    13,014
    On November 22, 2017, Henriquez filed a habeas petition before the California Supreme Court.

    http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.g...lTMCAgCg%3D%3D

  6. #6
    Administrator Moh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    13,014
    In today's orders, the United States Supreme Court declined to review Henriquez's petition for certiorari on direct appeal.

    Lower Ct: Supreme Court of California
    Case Numbers: (S089311)
    Decision Date: December 7, 2017
    Rehearing Denied: February 14, 2018

    https://www.supremecourt.gov/search....c/18-5375.html

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •