Man's Bid For Re-Sentencing Denied In 10-Year-old Boy's 1980 Murder

LOS ANGELES, CA — A state appeals court panel has rejected a bid for re-sentencing by a man who admitted at a civil trial that he killed a 10- year-old West Covina boy in 1980.

In its ruling this week, the three-justice panel from California's 2nd District Court of Appeal found that substantial evidence supports Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Victor D. Martinez's ruling that Danny Jerome Young is ineligible to be re-sentenced.

Young, now 67, is serving life in prison without the possibility of parole for the kidnapping and killing of Ronald Tolleson Jr., who was found dead April 4, 1980, in the defendant's garage, two doors away from the victim's home.

The panel noted in its 11-page ruling that Young admitted at a civil trial that he had killed the boy, but he maintained at the subsequent hearing on his re-sentencing bid that testimony had been false.

Young said he agreed to testify during the wrongful death trial against the city of West Covina and the police department in exchange for being transferred to another prison where he could receive medical treatment, according to the appellate court panel's ruling.

"Defendant contends his admission at the civil trial cannot constitute substantial evidence of guilt because it conflicted with the medical examiner's testimony at the criminal trial regarding the victim's time of death," according to the panel's ruling.

"Medical examiners make mistakes sometimes, and there is no legal barrier to a finder of fact crediting a defendant's admission of guilt over contradictory forensic evidence," the justices noted.

Young — who had denied at his criminal trial that he had participated in the kidnapping and killing but admitted calling the boy's family and demanding $3,000 — was convicted of second-degree murder and kidnapping for ransom, according to the ruling.

"It is of no moment the prosecutor at the criminal trial disclaimed the theory that defendant was the actual killer. The prosecutor did not have the benefit of defendant's later admission, and therefore proceeded on the evidence available at the time," the appellate court panel found.

The panel noted that the judge found that the testimony at the potential re-sentencing hearing "clarified everything that was missing in the (criminal) trial" and that the judge said "defendant admitted it under oath in another proceeding that he was the one who killed this young boy," noting that the judge added that Young "could be convicted on basically every theory of murder there currently is."