Está en la página 1de 3

INDETERMINATE SENTENCE PAROLE RELEASE REVIEW

(Penal Code Section 3041.2)


JOSE GONZALEZ, B-94419
First Degree Murder (two counts)
AFFIRM:

________________

MODIFY:

________________

REVERSE:

_______ X _______

STATEMENT OF FACTS
James and Essie Effron owned a clothing store in downtown San Diego. In 1977, after years of
running a successful business, the Effrons planned to retire. Mr. Effron, who was 62, suffered
from severe ulcers, and Mrs. Effron, who was 59, had recently undergone surgery and
chemotherapy for cancer. The couple hired Jose Gonzalez to help during the stores final weeks.
Throughout his employment, Mrs. Effron told her daughter that she found [Mr. Gonzalez]
downright frightening. Mrs. Effron eventually fired Mr. Gonzalez for being disrespectful to a
customer. She told her daughter that the stare he gave her [said] that he was going to kill her.
On November 21, 1977, three customers entered the store after closing time. They found the
store empty and the safe open, and called the police. Police responded and found the Effrons in
separate rooms in the basement of the store, each severely beaten in the head with a lead pipe.
Their hands were bound with neckties and their heads were covered with a jacket or smock.
Mrs. Effron had been beaten to death, and her jewelry had been taken from her body; her blood
covered the wall and the floor, and her brain and skull protruded from the back of her head. In
the next room, Mr. Effron was discovered tied to a clothing rack by the legs, face down in a pool
of his own blood, but alive and asking for help. He was taken to the hospital, where he named
Juan, Jesus, and Jose as his attackers. He died from severe head injuries several days later.
During their investigation, police noted that the stores safe was empty except for some papers
and a torn envelope containing $600. The cash register and cash box, containing $350, were
intact. A technician identified a fingerprint on the torn envelope as Mr. Gonzalezs. Police
contacted the store manager, who reported that there had been a disagreement between the
Effrons and several former employees, including Mr. Gonzalez. Police subsequently obtained a
search warrant and arrested Mr. Gonzalez. At the time of his arrest, Mr. Gonzalez had $360 and
a business card for a diamond store in his wallet. An employee at the diamond store identified
Mr. Gonzalez as the individual who sold him a diamond ring that had been taken from Mrs.
Effrons body.
GOVERNING LAW
The question I must answer is whether Mr. Gonzalez will pose a current danger to the public if
released from prison. The circumstances of the crime can provide evidence of current

Jose Gonzalez, B-94419


First Degree Murder
Page 2
dangerousness when the record also establishes that something in the inmates pre- or postincarceration history, or the inmates current demeanor and mental state, indicate that the
circumstances of the crime remain probative of current dangerousness. (In re Lawrence (2008)
44 Cal. 4th 1181, 1214.)
DECISION
The Board of Parole Hearings found Mr. Gonzalez suitable for parole based on his age, medical
conditions, length of time in prison, self-help programming, educational and vocational
achievements, lack of recent institutional misconduct, parole plans, and risk assessment.
I acknowledge Mr. Gonzalez has been in prison for nearly 40 years, suffers from various medical
conditions, is now 60 years old, and has made efforts to improve himself while incarcerated. He
has not been disciplined for serious institutional misconduct since 2007. He participated in selfhelp programming, including Alternatives to Violence, Anger Management, and Victim
Offender Insight. He earned his GED, completed vocational training, and received positive
ratings from his work supervisors. I commend Mr. Gonzalez for taking these positive steps. But
they are outweighed by negative factors that demonstrate he remains unsuitable for parole.
Mr. Gonzalezs crime was chilling and unconscionable. He participated in a brutal double
murder where the Effrons were bound, beaten in the head with a lead pipe, and left for dead in
the basement of their store. Mrs. Effron had recently undergone surgery and chemotherapy and
was particularly vulnerable when she was attacked. I note that the Effrons children have
appeared at Mr. Gonzalezs hearings to express their ongoing sense of loss, and that many
members of the community have written to oppose parole.
Mr. Gonzalez continues to minimize his role in this crime. He told the Board that he was angry
and felt cheated because he had been fired by the Effrons over a pay dispute. He claims,
however, that he and his co-defendants planned only to rob the Effrons. He said that while he
went through the store safe his co-defendants were supposed to be binding and blindfolding the
Effrons in the basement, and that after some time passed he went into the basement to see what
was taking them so long. According to Mr. Gonzalez, one of his crime partners was arguing
with Mr. Effron, who was tied to clothing rack. The crime partner allegedly pointed a gun at Mr.
Gonzalez and ordered him to kill Mr. Effron. Mr. Gonzalez asserts that he took a lead pipe,
stood between his crime partner and Mr. Effron, and struck Mr. Effron multiple times with the
pipe while also hitting the pipe of the clothing rack that Mr. Effron was tied to, in an attempt to
knock him unconscious, not to kill him. He denies ever seeing Mrs. Effron on the night of the
murders. He told the Board he was in shock, but then accompanied his crime partners to
Tijuana, where they divided the proceeds from the robbery.
These claims are entirely implausible. Mr. Gonzalez left behind a substantial amount of money
in the stores safe, cash register, cash box, and Mrs. Effrons purse. He beat Mr. Effron several
times in the head with a lead pipe and left him face down in a pool of blood, causing brain
contusions and a massive skull fracture that eventually killed him. Even after he claims he was
forced to kill Mr. Effron, Mr. Gonzalez accompanied his crime partners to Tijuana, pawned the

Jose Gonzalez, B-94419


First Degree Murder
Page 3
jewelry taken from Mrs. Effrons body, and maintained his innocence after he was arrested.
Until recently, Mr. Gonzalez denied that anger or resentment played any role in his decision to
rob the Effrons, and he continues to claim that he didnt hurt them out of revenge. Mr.
Gonzalezs statements simply do not add up. The psychologist who evaluated Mr. Gonzalez in
2014 noted that he continues to have ongoing difficulty accepting responsibility for past
transgressions, including his criminal history, institutional misconduct, and the life crime.
Similarly, the Board noted that he minimizes his responsibility for the murders, that he did not
take culpability for this [crime] and for a lot of your negative behaviors, and that his version of
the crime really doesnt make sense to us. Until Mr. Gonzalez accepts responsibility for his
actions and can better explain the rage and violence he displayed in carrying out this horrific
crime, I do not believe that he is prepared to be released.
CONCLUSION
I have considered the evidence in the record that is relevant to whether Mr. Gonzalez is currently
dangerous. When considered as a whole, I find the evidence shows that he currently poses an
unreasonable danger to society if released from prison. Therefore, I reverse the decision to
parole Mr. Gonzalez.

Decision Date: July 1, 2015

___________________________________
EDMUND G. BROWN JR.
Governor, State of California

También podría gustarte