Justices Confirm 2 Death Verdicts, Overturn a Third

The state Supreme Court on Thursday affirmed the death penalty for two convicted killers, but the justices overturned a death sentence imposed on a third defendant who never received a hearing on his competency to stand trial even though his sanity was questioned.

Thus far, the new court has upheld death sentences in six of 10 capital cases it has reviewed since the defeat of Chief Justice Rose Elizabeth Bird and two other justices in the 1986 fall election. In another case, the court is reconsidering a death sentence it previously upheld.

All three decisions issued Thursday were written by Chief Justice Malcolm M. Lucas.

The court, by a vote of 5 to 2, affirmed the death penalty rendered against Eric B. Kimble for the August, 1978, murders of Harry and Avonne Margulies in their home in Doheny Estates in Los Angeles. The Margulies were found bound, gagged, blindfolded and shot to death.

The court majority rejected Kimble’s claims that his sentence should be reversed because Los Angeles Superior Judge David F. Cunningham improperly instructed jurors to follow strict legal guidelines in deciding the defendant’s fate rather than “your personal choice.”

The judge correctly indicated that jurors could not exercise “unbridled discretion” in deciding whether to impose death but must weigh a list of factors--such as the defendant’s previous record--provided under the law, the court said.

In dissent, Justice Allen E. Broussard, joined by Justice Stanley Mosk, contended that the jury had been given “the false impression that the defendant’s character and background evidence was irrelevant.”

In the penalty phase of the case, Kimble’s lawyers had presented testimony that he was “caring, responsible . . . and a generous member of his community,” Broussard wrote.

Murder by Stabbing

In a second case, the justices unanimously upheld the death penalty imposed against Richard Adams Hovey in the kidnaping and stabbing murder of 8-year-old Tina Salazar in Hayward in March, 1978.

The court acknowledged that there were some procedural errors in Hovey’s trial, but concluded that they could not have affected the outcome.

In a concurring opinion, Mosk expressed concern about when a series of errors--all harmless individually--become harmful when viewed collectively.

“On the one hand, five times zero equals zero, “ Mosk wrote. “On the other hand, as Plutarch pointed out nearly 20 centuries ago in ‘Of the Training of Children,’ ‘water continually dropping will wear hard rocks hollow.’ ”

Mosk noted that the prosecutor in the case had told jurors that the parents of the dead girl also were “victims” in the case.” But while a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling bars formal “victim impact statements” from being read to jurors in capital cases, the prosecutor’s reference in this case was only a “fleeting comment” and had little potential impact on the jury, Mosk said.

Overturn Conviction

In the third case decided Thursday, the court unanimously overturned the conviction and death sentence of Brian Darle Hale, accused in the murders of Clarence Temple and Herman Silber during robberies in Los Angeles in 1980.

At a preliminary hearing, Hale exhibited what the court called “abnormal and bizarre behavior,” saying to the judge in the case:

“My Honor, His Honor. Hey, it’s not His Honor, it’s my Honor. . . . You can’t restrain me.” Hale also repeatedly referred to the judge as “Fatso.”

A hearing to determine Hale’s mental competency was scheduled but for unexplained reasons was not held before he was convicted and sentenced.

The justices, noting that there had been “substantial evidence” of Hale’s mental incompetence, reversed his conviction and ordered new proceedings to determine his present competency to stand trial.