|For Immediate Release
May 28, 2013
|Susan Kang Schroeder
Chief of Staff
OCDA TO OPPOSE PAROLE OF INMATE CONVICTED OF KILLING 13-YEAR-OLD BOY IN 1990 DRIVE-BY SHOOTING
SANTA ANA – Orange County District Attorney (OCDA) Tony Rackauckas is opposing the parole of a man convicted of killing a 13-year-old boy in a drive-by shooting in 1990. Christopher Edward Perez, 48, formerly of Anaheim, is currently being held at California State Prison, Solano. Perez was sentenced March 10, 1992, to 28 years to life in state prison after he was found guilty by a judge of one felony count of first degree murder, four felony counts of attempted murder, and enhancements for the personal discharge of a firearm from a motor vehicle causing death and great bodily injury, and the personal use of firearm. The case was originally prosecuted by Senior Deputy District Attorney Randy Pawloski. Perez is scheduled for a parole hearing tomorrow, Wednesday, May 29, 2013, at 10:30 a.m. at the prison before the Board of Parole Hearings, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.
Deputy District Attorney Israel Claustro will appear at the hearing to oppose Perez’s parole.
Circumstances of the Crime
At approximately 9:30 p.m. on June 3, 1990, then-25-year-old Perez and two of his fellow gang members drove through an Anaheim neighborhood with the intent to murder a local drug dealer as revenge for the drug dealer vandalizing Perez’s car over a $4 debt. The inmate drove slowly down an alley, where the drug dealer was standing with a group of people, and began shooting several rounds.
Eulises Carranza, a 13-year-old boy who lived in a nearby apartment complex, was collecting aluminum cans to recycle when he was hit in the chest by a stray bullet fired by Perez. The victim was pronounced dead at a nearby hospital shortly thereafter. The defendant also hit four other people in the alley, who were injured with non-life-threatening gunshot wounds.
Lack of Rehabilitation and a Threat to Public Safety
Since his last hearing in 2008, Perez has been cited for five prison rules violations including aggressive irritability and disrespect toward a staff member, taking a cellphone from a corrections officer, possessing a cellphone, a memory card, and a tattoo gun. In the OCDA’s parole opposition letter, the People state, “His inability to follow institutional rules demonstrates that he will similarly be unable to remain disciplinary free while in the community.”
Perez has failed to participate in any vocational training since 2010 and had a difficult time completing vocational training programs prior to that time, including failing to complete masonry and carpentry programs due to a disagreement with his supervisor and lack of interest.
Perez has attended self-help programs sporadically but has never committed to a long-term program to deal with drug abuse. The inmate has not established a sobriety and relapse prevention plan to prepare for potential parole. Perez represents a high risk of violence, and therefore, should not be released.