![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/Chief-10-765x510.jpg\")
\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n
FRESNO, Calif. \u2014 A Fresno County Superior Court judge found a teenage girl guilty of first-degree murder Monday, ruling that the accused aided and abetted the alleged gunman in the killing of Caleb Quick despite the prosecution\u2019s case resting on circumstantial evidence and the defense maintaining she never knew a murder was planned.<\/p>\n
The accused was charged with murder in the death of 18-year-old Caleb Quick. He was fatally shot in a McDonald\u2019s parking lot on April 23, 2025.<\/p>\n
The prosecution alleged she drove the getaway car for the alleged gunman. The defense argued she had no knowledge of any plan to kill Quick.<\/p>\n
The case was heard in juvenile court. The accused, now 18, was 16 at the time of the shooting.<\/p>\n
In closing, the prosecution argued the accused was not merely present but was a willing participant who aided and abetted the alleged gunman with the specific intent to kill.<\/p>\n
\u201cIntent exists in the mind,\u201d the prosecution said. Because that intent cannot be seen directly, prosecutors argued, it must be inferred from a person\u2019s words and actions.<\/p>\n
The prosecution said the case turned on circumstantial evidence. Prosecutors argued the timeline pointed to only one reasonable conclusion.<\/p>\n
The prosecution traced the events to April 22, 2025. That day, the accused learned from a friend, referred to in court as Jane Doe, of an alleged sexual assault involving Quick. The prosecution said she relayed the information to the alleged gunman by text.<\/p>\n
The prosecution said the accused and the alleged gunman arrived at the McDonald\u2019s together around 7:45 p.m. on the night of the shooting.<\/p>\n
The prosecution noted that the accused and the alleged shooter abruptly left at about 8:10 p.m., after the accused told friends she was taking him home. The prosecution called that statement a lie meant to hide their plan to kill Quick.<\/p>\n
The prosecution argued the pair drove to a nearby location. There, the alleged gunman changed into black clothing and armed himself with a silver revolver.<\/p>\n
The accused then returned alone about 8:34 p.m., the prosecution said. She parked several rows back. She immediately raised the sexual assault allegation with friends.<\/p>\n
The prosecution argued the alleged gunman entered the restaurant and watched Quick for nearly 20 minutes. He then followed Quick into the parking lot and shot him once in the head.<\/p>\n
The prosecution pointed to surveillance footage of the alleged gunman seated and watching. \u201cThis is evidence of deliberation. This is evidence of premeditation,\u201d the prosecution said.<\/p>\n
The prosecution said the accused was the only person to leave the restaurant afterward. She ran past the wounded Quick without helping. She then drove to pick up the alleged gunman.<\/p>\n
Prosecutors pointed to text messages the two exchanged hours later. The accused wrote, \u201cI\u2019m just in shock honestly\u2026 Like idk how to feel.\u201d The alleged gunman replied, \u201cMe either.\u201d<\/p>\n
The prosecution also noted the accused\u2019s DNA was found on the suspected murder weapon. Prosecutors argued she later tried to get rid of the vehicle used that night, which they called evidence of consciousness of guilt.<\/p>\n
The prosecution called the killing \u201ca planned public execution.\u201d Prosecutors asked the court to find her guilty of first-degree murder.<\/p>\n
Defense attorney Jeff Hammerschmidt countered that the accused, who was 16 at the time, had no history of violence. He said she considered Quick a close friend. That made her an unlikely participant in a plan to kill him, he argued.<\/p>\n
He argued the prosecution had no direct evidence the accused intended a murder. Prosecutors were asking the court to speculate about her state of mind, he said.<\/p>\n
Hammerschmidt conceded the accused \u201cknew something was going to happen\u201d that night. But he argued she believed the plan was to confront or assault Quick, not to kill him.<\/p>\n
He noted the alleged gunman had earlier asked another teenager to help beat up Quick. That pointed to an assault rather than a planned killing, he said.<\/p>\n
Hammerschmidt also challenged the DNA evidence. He said the DNA expert testified it could not establish when or how the accused\u2019s DNA reached the murder weapon, which was a revolver.<\/p>\n
He argued the accused\u2019s reaction after the shooting was inconsistent with someone who had planned the murder. She went to Quick\u2019s vigil after the killing. He described the accused as \u201cinconsolable\u201d and not acting or behaving like a person who had knowingly taken part in an execution-style murder.<\/p>\n
Hammerschmidt also pointed to the law on circumstantial evidence. He argued that if the evidence supported two reasonable interpretations, one pointing to guilt and one pointing to innocence, the court had to adopt the one pointing to innocence.<\/p>\n
In rebuttal to the defense closing argument, the prosecution argued the accused\u2019s emotional response did not erase her conduct before and after the shooting.<\/p>\n
Prosecutors said several of her actions showed she understood what was going to happen. Those included her failure to help Quick after he was shot, her decision to pick up the alleged gunman and her later attempts to conceal her knowledge.<\/p>\n
The judge found the accused aided and abetted the alleged gunman. He ruled her guilty of first-degree murder. Because the case was heard in juvenile court, the judge allowed cameras in the courtroom since the accused is now 18.<\/p>\n
The accused is scheduled to return to court Aug. 31.<\/p>\n
The alleged gunman\u2019s transfer hearing is set to begin Sept. 1, when it will be decided whether he is tried as an adult. The hearing is expected to last about five court days.<\/p>\n
To comment please go to one of these social media platforms:<\/p>\n
Facebook: https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/DavisVanguard<\/a><\/p>\n LinkedIn: https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/peoples-vanguard-of-davis-inc\/<\/a><\/p>\n Instagram: https:\/\/www.instagram.com\/davisvanguard\/<\/a><\/p>\n X: https:\/\/x.com\/davisvanguard<\/a><\/p>\n Bluesky: https:\/\/bsky.app\/profile\/vanguardnewsgroup.bsky.social<\/a><\/p>\n Subscribe <\/a>to the Vanguard News letters.\u00a0 To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org\/donate<\/a> or give directly through ActBlue<\/a>.\u00a0 Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.<\/p>\n Categories: Breaking News<\/a> Court Watch<\/a> Northern California Court Watch<\/a> Vanguard Court Watch<\/a> Tags: Aiding and Abetting<\/a> Caleb Quick<\/a> Circumstantial Evidence<\/a> first-degree murder<\/a> Fresno County Superior Court<\/a> Juvenile Justice<\/a>