This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Politics & Government

State Supreme Court Won't Review Case of North Hollywood Man Convicted of Church Shooting

Fernando Diaz was convicted of two counts each of attempted murder.

The California Supreme Court refused today to hear the case against a North Hollywood man who shot his ex-girlfriend and two other people at a church carnival just over four years ago.

The state's highest court denied a defense petition seeking review of the case against .

Diaz was convicted of two counts each of attempted murder and assault with a firearm and one count of possession of a firearm by a felon.

Find out what's happening in North Hollywood-Toluca Lakewith free, real-time updates from Patch.

On May 16, a three-justice panel from California's 2nd District Court of Appeal rejected Diaz's claim that there was insufficient evidence to support the attempted murder charges.

The appellate court justices noted Diaz's argument that he acted "under
the weight of his demons,'' was merely trying to "deliver some type of
important message of frustration'' and "was not prepared to be in a public
setting or for that matter to kill anyone.''

Find out what's happening in North Hollywood-Toluca Lakewith free, real-time updates from Patch.

But the panel found "substantial evidence supported a finding that defendant intended to kill'' his son's mother and a bystander at a carnival at St. John Baptist de la Salle Catholic Church on May 17, 2008.

"Defendant was not firing into the air above everyone's head, or firing multiple shots at a tight cluster of people from a great distance. He was instead turning his body and his aim from one victim or potential victim to another and firing at relatively close range. No evidence supported defendant's theory on appeal that the rifle `just went off' accidentally,'' according to the appellate panel.

Diaz was sentenced in May 2011 to life plus 67 years to life in prison.


The appellate court panel lopped two years off of the sentence, finding that
the trial court should have imposed a one-year term -- rather than a three-year
term -- for a great bodily injury enhancement on one of the assault charges.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?