By Sarah Gregory
Alejandro Loza Quezada is charged with murder, attempted murder, shooting at an occupied vehicle, possession of a firearm while being previously convicted of a felony, and possession of a controlled substance for sale. Quezada was allegedly involved in a shooting on July 1, 2016.
He was at his cousin’s house that day fixing his car. After the defendant was finished, he took the vehicle for a test drive around the neighborhood. The only passenger in the vehicle was in the front seat.
The defendant was driving when another car rapidly approached from behind. There was a driver and passenger in the front seat of this car as well.
The occupants of the car behind the defendant were both wearing blue hats. After the shooting, one of these individuals identified himself as a member of the Sureños and claimed the defendant and his passenger were both members of the Norteños.
The Norteños and Sureños, both street gangs, are longtime rivals. Blue is also a gang identifier for the Sureños.
As the other car approached from the rear, the defendant, allegedly affiliated with the Norteños, turned around and began shooting at the Sureños. The men in blue hats responded by giving chase to the defendant and his passenger.
At some point, the defendant began chasing the Sureños instead. Eventually, the defendant and his passenger stopped their vehicle on the side of the street. Both occupants exited the vehicle.
The vehicle with the men in the blue hats, members of the Sureños, came to a stop as well. The defendant and his passenger were waiting for the other men in the middle of the road. The passenger of the other vehicle stepped out and raised a gun, pointing at the defendant.
The defendant, still in the middle of the roadway, raised a 9mm pistol and fired 12 shots at the other men. A bullet grazed the lower body of the passenger and another lodged itself into the shoulder of the driver. The driver of the other vehicle, identified as Geovanny Gomez, died at the hospital a short while later.
The defendant and his passenger ran to a nearby home where a known gang member had previously lived. The defendant banged on the front door and screamed, “It’s me, let me in!”
Hearing no answer, the defendant ran to the side of the house and kicked down the side gate. The defendant and his passenger both peeked into the windows at the back of the house to see if anyone was home. When they realized that no one appeared to be home, both men jumped over the back fence and kept running.
Detective Dana Tello, a county deputy sheriff and member of the Yolo County Gang Task Force, was called to the stand by Deputy District Attorney Kyle Hasapes. The prosecutor, Hasapes, began by establishing Tello’s credibility. Tello has been with the Yolo County Sheriff’s Office for nearly 12 years. She was assigned to the defendant’s case on the day of the shooting.
Over a week later, on July 12, 2016, Detective Tello took a statement from a witness in the case. This individual, who will be referred to as “CT,” bought 9mm bullets for the defendant a few days prior to the shooting. The prosecutor asked Tello to recount the witness’ statement.
CT was shown in surveillance video purchasing 9mm bullets for the defendant at Big 5 Sporting Goods in Woodland. The witness was with the defendant and a friend of his at the time.
The defendant had asked his friend to pick him up from his apartment in order to buy bullets. However, the defendant decided to pick up his brother before going to Big 5. He made his friend drive to his brother’s house, but they found that the brother was not home at the time.
As the defendant and his friend were about ready to leave for the store, CT requested a ride from them, as she had to go grocery shopping. The defendant and his friend obliged.
First, the trio went to a liquor store, then a grocery store, and finally to Big 5 Sporting Goods.
When they arrived at Big 5, only the friend and CT went inside. The friend purchased a box of .45 caliber bullets by mistake. The defendant wanted 9mm bullets.
CT and the friend had to go back inside to purchase the correct bullets. This time, it was CT who purchased the box of 9mm bullets.
The defendant was unable to purchase the bullets himself because he has previously been convicted of a felony and it is, therefore, illegal for him to possess a firearm or live ammunition in the state of California.
Next, Detective Jeff Moe, who is also a member of the Yolo County Gang Task Force, was recalled as the final witness. The prosecutor began his direct examination by posing a hypothetical.
The prosecutor proposed an individual who possessed 36 grams of methamphetamine which were separated into three different amounts: 17 grams, 13 grams and 6 grams. There was also, hypothetically, a cell phone packaged in a clear plastic bag, a digital scale and a little over $1,300 in small denominations of cash. The prosecutor asked whether or not Moe believes that, in this scenario, the drugs are meant for sale.
Detective Moe replied that he does think, in this case, the drugs would be meant for sale. He came to this conclusion based on a few factors.
The packaged phone indicates that cell phone is used to call the individual’s clients to schedule a drug deal; the separate amounts of methamphetamine can be used for easy distribution; smaller denominations of cash reflect the amount of money people usually have in their pockets and could possibly buy drugs with; and the digital scale implies the methamphetamine is weighed in order to properly package different amounts.
Next, the defense attorney, Deputy Public Defender Martha Sequeira, cross-examined Detective Moe. She asked Moe if the majority of people have cell phones. He did not answer the defense’s question and instead replied that not all people have cell phones, including himself.
The defense further inquired that, if Moe did not have a cell phone, how he could judge that the cell phone in the hypothetical was used for the sale of methamphetamine. There was an objection from the prosecutor and the defense was asked to move on to the next question.
She asked Moe if the clear plastic bag had any relevance to his judgment that the cell phone was used for making drug deals. Again, the prosecutor objected and the defense changed the question.
The defense asked Detective Moe why he thought a little over $1,300 in cash indicates the individual in the hypothetical is a drug dealer. Moe replied because it is an unusually high amount of money to carry around. Then she asked Moe if this meant anyone carrying that much money was a drug dealer. He stated the negative, and that the main factor was the amount of methamphetamine which the individual possessed.
Next, Judge David Reed reviewed all of the evidence submitted during the hearing and verified each one with both parties. Afterward, the prosecutor and the defense both summarized the evidence for the court and how they view each piece of evidence in relation to the charges.
None of the charges were dismissed. Judge Reed held the defendant, Alejandro Quezada, accountable for all five counts.
