About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


45 Stan. L. Rev. 1011 (1992-1993)
Horses of the Night: Harris v. Vasquez

handle is hein.journals/stflr45 and id is 1029 raw text is: Horses of the Night: Harris v. Vasquez John T. Noonan, Jr.* I. CANNIBAL On July 5, 1978 Robert Alton Harris and his brother Daniel set out to steal a stranger's automobile so that they could have a getaway car when they robbed the San Diego Trust and Savings Bank. In a parking lot directly across from the bank two boys sat in a green Ford, eating hamburgers. Rob- ert Harris pulled out a pistol and told the boys to drive to a fire trail near Mirama Lake. Daniel followed in his brother's car. At the foot of the trail, the cars were parked. The boys were forced to walk up the trail at gunpoint. Part way up, Robert Harris shot one of the boys, John Mayeski, aged fifteen, in the back. He put a second bullet in his head. The other boy, Michael Baker, aged sixteen, ran and hid in the brush. Robert Harris pursued him. He begged for his life. Harris shot him four times. He came back to John Mayeski and shot him again in the head. The Harrises returned to Robert's house. He ate the rest of the boys' unfinished hamburgers. He laughed at his brother for not having the stom- ach to join him in the meal. The Harrises then robbed the bank and returned to Robert's house with the proceeds of the robbery. A witness followed them to the house and called the police. They were arrested a little after 1:00 in the afternoon. At 4:00 p.m. Daniel informed police of the murders and at 6:30 p.m. put the blame on Robert. At 7:00 Robert confessed. At midnight he was examined by a psychiatrist retained by the state, Wait Griswold.' Nine months later Robert Harris went on trial in the Superior Court of San Diego County. He was charged with two counts of murder. He re- tracted his confession. His defense was innocence: He had not shot the boys. He was found guilty.2 The jury then entered on the penalty phase. By statute the jury was directed to take into account and be guided by the aggravating and mitigat- ing circumstances referred to in this section.'3 The circumstances men- tioned included whether the defendant's ability to conform his conduct to * United States Judge, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. This paper is dedicated to the mem- ory of Robert Cover, brilliant teacher and writer, humane defender of human obligations to God. It was in substance delivered as the second Robert Cover Memorial Lecture, Yale Law School, Decem- ber 7, 1992, and at Stanford Law School, November 18, 1992. 1. People v. Harris, 28 Cal. 3d 935, 944-45, 623 P.2d 240, 243-44, 171 Cal. Rptr. 679, 683-84 (1981). 2. People v. Harris, 623 P.2d at 245. 3. CAL. PENAL CODE § 190.3 (West 1988). 1011