A state appeals court panel Tuesday upheld a man’s conviction for voluntary manslaughter for stabbing a 30-year-old Oakland man in the Mid-City area of Los Angeles nearly 3 1/2 years ago.
The three-justice panel from California’s 2nd District Court of Appeal rejected the defense’s contention that jurors were improperly instructed in Rolando Alexander Maura’s trial..
Maura, now 64, was charged with murder for the March 11, 2022, stabbing of Justin Dumas, but was convicted in 2023 of the lesser charge of voluntary manslaughter — the only charge he challenged in his appeal.
He was also found guilty of a hit-and-run driving charge involving a collision in which the Kia Soul he was driving went through a red light and struck a Mercedes-Benz moments earlier at the intersection of La Brea Avenue and Washington Boulevard.
Dumas had been talking to his mother on the phone early that morning when she heard screeching in the background and she asked what had happened, and Dumas told her that there was a car accident and that he had almost been hit, according to the appellate court panel’s ruling, which noted that the woman said she subsequently heard the sounds of scuffling.
The appellate court justices noted that a witness testified to seeing Dumas chase after Maura following the crash and saw the two men square off and begin fighting when the victim caught up with him.
Dumas was taken to a hospital, where he was pronounced dead from a stab wound to the chest, according to the 11-page ruling, which noted that he also had a sharp-force injury on his forearm that was consistent with a defensive wound.
Maura testified in his own defense during the trial, telling jurors that he feared he was being followed by several cars following a night of gambling, didn’t want to be caught by them and felt he had to defend himself, according to the ruling.
“Defendant admitted that he intentionally swung his knife at Dumas. This resulted in a fatal stab wound to Dumas’s chest, a vital area of his body,” the panel wrote.
“Crediting defendant’s testimony that he did not want to kill Dumas and did not aim for a specific part of Dumas’s body, the evidence still only supports the conclusion that defendant acted with conscious disregard for human life,” the justices found in upholding his conviction.
Following the jury’s verdict, a judge found true an aggravating factor that Maura had served a prior prison term and sentenced him to 12 years and eight months in state prison, the appellate court panel noted.
Not mentioned was that the victim beat his mother so severely a few days before the incident that she was hospitalized. Also that a fact that was ignored in the appeal is that when the jury asked for the definition of voluntary and involuntary manslaughter the judge told them they know what it means. Don’t judge based on biased opinions.
Si hubiesen tenido en cuenta,la conduta anterior de lá victima(haber golpeado a sú madre,unos dias antes del incidente),se hubiese podido apreciar que tenia condutas violentas,además,el testigo declaro claramente haber visto a lá victima (luego del accidente) perseguir a Maura,o sea,lá victima lo persiguio con el único objetivo de pelear y quizas hasta de matar,Maura testifica que sentia MIEDO,que a que vario veículos lo estuvieran perseguindo,para luego voltear y ver a un hombre violento,que de seguro iva dispuesto liquidar a Maura.Veo que no se há tenido en cuenta vários fatores que no pueden ser de culpabilidad, aunque el acusado lo admita por conveniencia y si se han dejado llevar porque éste,habia sido sancionado anteriormente mente,para luego condenarlo a tantos años de prisión.Y QUE LA PALABRA MIEDO,NO LA TUVIERON EN CUENTA.Mi hermano no es un asno.Mis condolencias a los familiares.