A state appeals court panel has upheld a man’s second-degree murder conviction for an alcohol-fueled crash in West Covina that killed a friend.

The three-justice panel from California’s 2nd District Court of Appeal rejected the defense’s contention that there was insufficient evidence to support Angel Rojo’s conviction stemming from the March 8, 2014, collision that killed his 26-year-old passenger, Manuel Ernesto Rodriguez.

“The natural consequences of driving through a residential area at 80 to 100 miles per hour while drunk endanger life. There was sufficient evidence for the jury to infer Rojo appreciated that fact but consciously disregarded it,” the appellate court panel found in its ruling Thursday. “After Rojo ran two consecutive stop signs, he told Rodriguez, `All right. I will slow down.’ That shows awareness of the risk he was creating.”

The appellate court justices noted that Rojo’s trial attorney conceded at trial that “Rojo was drunk when all this happened,” but no blood or breath sample was ever taken from him.

Along with second-degree murder, the Covina resident was convicted in December 2017 of one count each of hit-and-run driving resulting in death or serious injury to another person, dissuading a witness by force or threat, preventing or dissuading a witness from reporting a crime and petty theft.

Rojo — who was among a group of several men who had been partying at an apartment complex in West Covina — took property from a woman and threatened her as he left the area on March 8, 2014, according to Deputy District Attorney Ross Alari.

Rojo drove away from the scene with his friend in his car, driving at high speeds on city streets before losing control of the vehicle, which crashed into a tree, the prosecutor said.

Rojo threatened witnesses to the collision as he ran away from the scene, according to Alari. He was arrested by police soon afterward and has remained behind bars since then.

Rojo was sentenced in April 2018 to 63 years to life in state prison, but the appellate court panel ordered the case to be sent back to the trial court for re-sentencing as a result of a new state law.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *