A Fresno County judge has found the allegation of first-degree murder true, ruling that Cassandra Michael aided and abetted her boyfriend in the killing of Caleb Quick.
In delivering the verdict, the court found that Michael knowingly participated in a preexisting plan to kill Quick and assisted in carrying out the crime.
The judge concluded Michael created a false alibi and repeatedly misled friends on the night of the shooting.
"There is only one reasonable explanation for that," the judge said, concluding Michael knew of the plan and knew her boyfriend intended to kill Quick.
RELATED: California families urge changes to Prop 57 during rally at State Capitol
The court found beyond a reasonable doubt that Michael aided and abetted the murder and "basically assisted in Mr. Rangel's surprise attack."
The judge also cited testimony from Dana Moen, who said Michael sounded normal during a phone call after the shooting, as well as evidence that Michael ran past Quick's body and left the area while others remained behind, as evidence of consciousness of guilt.
The court concluded the prosecution proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Michael was guilty of first-degree murder under an aiding-and-abetting theory.
A dispositional hearing is scheduled for Sept. 2.
During closing arguments, Chief Deputy District Attorney Kendall Reynolds argued the evidence showed a coordinated plan between Michael and the suspected teen shooter.
Reynolds called the killing a "planned execution" and argued Michael provided the opportunity for the shooting to occur.
He focused heavily on cellphone data, surveillance video, witness testimony and messages exchanged between Michael and her boyfriend after Jane Doe disclosed allegations against Quick.
RELATED: Detectives detail search Warrants, digital evidence and DNA testing in Caleb Quick's death
According to Reynolds, the plan began on April 23 when Michael falsely told friends she was taking her boyfriend home. Prosecutors argued cellphone evidence showed she instead drove him to another location before returning alone to McDonald's.
Reynolds argued it was at that location where her boyfriend changed into the all-black clothing seen worn by the suspected shooter and armed himself with a gun.
Reynolds argued that the masked gunman's later arrival at McDonald's, his observation of Quick inside the restaurant and his pursuit of Quick outside demonstrated planning and premeditation.
"This is willful, deliberate, and premeditated murder," Reynolds argued.
The prosecutor contended Michael helped identify Quick's whereabouts that evening, discussed allegations against him shortly before the shooting and later served as the getaway driver.
Reynolds also pointed to testimony that Michael was the only person seen leaving the restaurant immediately after the shooting.
"Was she scared? Absolutely not, because there was a plan in place," Reynolds argued.
The prosecution further cited DNA evidence tying Michael to one of the revolvers recovered during the investigation, cellphone-location data placing the couple together throughout the evening and text messages exchanged after the shooting.
Reynolds argued one message exchange was particularly significant. After texting that she was home, Michael later wrote, "I'm just in shock honestly... like idk how to feel."
Reynolds argued the message did not reflect surprise that the shooting had occurred but instead demonstrated prior knowledge of what was going to happen.
The prosecutor also referenced evidence that Michael later drove a different vehicle and told investigators she did not know who would want to harm Quick.
RELATED: Jane Doe in Caleb Quick's alleged sexual assault testifies in trial
"This was a planned public execution," Reynolds told the court, asking the judge to find Michael guilty of first-degree murder.
Defense attorney Jeff Hammerschmidt argued prosecutors failed to prove the most important element of their case: that Michael intended for Quick to be killed.
Hammerschmidt emphasized Michael's lack of any history of violence and argued the prosecution's motive theory was weak.
Hammerschmidt referenced the motive proposed by the prosecution, that Michael and her boyfriend were avenging an alleged sexual assault committed by Quick against an acquaintance of Michael's.
He noted that Quick had been a close friend of Michael's, while Jane Doe was not among her closest friends.
"Not a very good premise for first-degree murder for someone with no prior criminal record," Hammerschmidt said of the prosecution's motive argument.
The defense challenged the significance of DNA evidence found on a revolver recovered during the investigation, arguing experts testified DNA transfer can occur indirectly and could have happened long before the shooting.
Hammerschmidt acknowledged that Michael may have believed something was going to happen that night, but argued the evidence supported only one conclusion: that she expected a confrontation, not a killing.
RELATED: Family of suspected shooter in Caleb Quick murder testifies in court
"She knew something would happen that night, but she did not want Caleb dead," Hammerschmidt argued.
The defense pointed to testimony that the suspected shooter disliked Quick and was jealous of some of Michael's male friends.
Hammerschmidt suggested the shooting may have been an impulsive act rather than the result of a shared murder plot.
He also highlighted testimony from the shooter's brother, who described Michael as crying, upset and inconsolable after the shooting, as well as testimony that she attended Quick's vigil the following day and was seen crying there.
The defense argued there was no direct evidence showing Michael knew a murder would occur, maintaining she was not guilty of participating in a plan to kill Quick.
For news updates, follow Vincent Camarillo on Instagram.