Day 1 - September 26, 2019

The court addressed exhibit procedures, denied a motion concerning the Dolce vita video, and ruled on witness sequestration before openings.

The court gave the jury foundational instructions on evidence, impartiality, outside research, and the defendants' right to remain silent.

The State previewed its alleged murder-for-hire theory, expected surveillance and phone evidence, Rivera's expected account, and alleged post-killing payments.

Garcia's counsel challenged Rivera's expected testimony and argued that Rivera was the shooter, not Garcia.

The court sustained the State's objection to proposed defense photographs and client statements during opening statements, without deciding their ultimate admissibility.

Kawass argued that Magbanua was innocent, previewed alternative explanations for the State's financial evidence, and challenged Luis Rivera's anticipated reliability.

Neighbor James Geiger described hearing a loud bang, seeing a light-colored vehicle leave Markel's driveway, and finding Markel injured in his running car before calling 911.

Geiger estimated that he saw the departing vehicle for about ten to 15 seconds but could not identify its occupants or driver; he also said he likely stepped on glass near Markel's car.

The court admitted and played Geiger's 911 call, which captured his immediate observations of the injured neighbor and a departing light-colored vehicle.

The parties addressed a juror's question about whether Dan Markel's house was to the left or right when viewing the area.

Geiger identified his house and Mr. Markel's house in response to a juror question.

David Sims described finding Mr. Markel unresponsive in a running vehicle and testified that officers found no signs of forced entry, struggle, or robbery.

Sims said he could not determine Markel's movements or the placement of items in the vehicle before he arrived.

Schlazer described hearing a loud sound during a phone call after Markel reported an unfamiliar person in his driveway, then calling 911.

Schlazer said he could not now recall whether Markel said “person” or “persons,” but believed his prior statement used the singular.

The court set rules for names, objections, sidebars, and lunch-time review of marked exhibits.

Forensic specialist Joanne Maltese documented scene evidence, vehicle and hospital photographs, and the limits of fingerprint recovery; the court overruled an objection to a hospital photograph.

Maltese described limits on her present recollection of scene measurements and confirmed that several garage items were not forensically examined.

Dr. Anthony Clark described the autopsy findings, two gunshot wounds, range and glass-related injury indicators, and his homicide determination.

Clark explained his trajectory analysis, described recent discussions with Shawn Yao, and gave the date he finalized the autopsy report.

Brown authenticated video from StarMetro buses 505 and 707; the court admitted State's Exhibit 125 without objection.

Brown described limited visibility of Prius occupants and said the jury video was an altered, annotated version; the court reserved on a defense discovery objection.

Brock Dietz described how he prepared annotated Premier Fitness and city-bus surveillance clips without changing their underlying subjects or brightness.

Dietz said the State directed five rounds of clarifications to the surveillance-video exhibits, with a final copy provided the week before trial.

Dietz said the surveillance-video clarifications were made on a working copy and did not alter the original footage.

The parties discussed the State's remaining witnesses and whether to begin a lengthy witness later in the day.

Digital-forensics investigator Michael Dillmore authenticated Apple iCloud reports and extracted materials; the court overruled a hearsay objection to contact-entry testimony.

Dillmore described the limits of his iCloud-data review and said he generally left analysis to investigators; the court curtailed further questioning about Magbanua's own iCloud data.

Dillmore confirmed that investigators divided tasks, and the court retained him under sequestration.

Rodriguez authenticated a Cellebrite extraction from wendi Adelson's phone; the court excluded the full report but admitted selected contact, call-log, and voice-mail extracts over objection.

Rodriguez agreed that transferred digital material should not be manipulated or altered; the court kept her under sequestration.

The prosecutor sought to recall Mr. Brown to introduce the original bus footage after concerns were raised about alterations to the admitted disk.

Brown authenticated unannotated original bus footage as the State sought to admit Exhibit 173; defense requested voir dire.

Brown confirmed the bus footage was the same material provided in 2014, and the court admitted Exhibit 173 while setting next-morning hearings on Yao's opinion and Video No. 125.