Man Found Guilty of Murder in 1983 Slaying

Twenty-two-year-old William Noguera was convicted Wednesday of first-degree murder in the bludgeoning death four years ago of his girlfriend’s mother, a killing the prosecutor suggested was motivated by a $25,000 insurance policy on the victim’s life.

The jurors, who began deliberating April 22, will reconvene May 18 in Orange County Superior Court for the penalty phase of Noguera’s trial. They will decide whether he should be sentenced to death or to 25 years to life in prison. He is eligible for the death penalty because the jury found Wednesday that he had killed for financial gain.

Noguera’s sister wept as the verdict was read, and his mother bitterly attacked prosecutors and called her son “a good kid and a gentleman.”

“There’s not enough evidence to convict my son,” Sarita Noguera insisted after the verdict was read. “He is innocent.”

Her son, Sarita Noguera said, is still in love with Dominique Navarro, the victim’s daughter. Dominique Navarro was convicted of first-degree murder in 1984 and is in the custody of the California Youth Authority. “They both still love each other,” Sarita Noguera said.

Navarro, 16 at the time of the crime, refused to testify against Noguera.

Jovita V. Navarro of La Habra was slain April 24, 1983. Deputy Dist. Atty. Richard M. King argued that the motive was the proceeds from a $25,000 life insurance policy on Mrs. Navarro. The weapon, according to evidence at the trial, was a martial-arts baton.

Superior Court Judge Robert R. Fitzgerald ordered the jurors not to comment on the case because the penalty phase has not been completed.

Noguera’s defense in the two-month trial was shaken when a witness who had established an alibi returned to the stand to recant her testimony.

Marjorie Noone told jurors that she had “lied” when she swore earlier that she and Noguera were in bed at the time of the crime.

Testifying under a grant of immunity, Noone said she had delivered false testimony after Noguera threatened to hurt her or her family if she failed to cooperate.

Sarita Noguera insisted that the case, based on circumstantial evidence, is weak. She said neither her son nor her family was in need of money.

“We paid $120,000” for the defense, Sarita Noguera said. “We don’t need the money.”

Benjamin R. Campos, one of Noguera’s attorneys, said Fitzgerald “gave us a fair trial. I respectfully disagree with some of his rulings.” Campos declined further comment.

A key prosecution witness was Ricky Abrams, thrice convicted of auto theft.

Abrams testified that he, Noguera and Dominique Navarro planned the murder at a restaurant. He said he never agreed to kill the woman but listened as the other two laid plans to fake a burglary to throw police off track.

The defense attacked Abrams’ credibility. King argued that Abrams had no motive for lying and would not have known the amount of Mrs. Navarro’s insurance coverage unless he had learned it from Noguera and Dominique Navarro.

Sarita Noguera maintains that her son and Dominique Navarro, who may be held by the Youth Authority until she is 25, are innocent.

Evidence was not presented about blond hair found in the victim’s home or Caucasian skin found under her fingernails, Sarita Noguera claimed. Campos said later that he was not aware of any such evidence.