A 31-year-old Pomona man is facing three counts of murder after a high-speed police chase on April 1, 2026 ended in a crash that killed a 9-months-pregnant woman, her boyfriend, and her unborn child. The defendant was scheduled to be arraigned today, but the hearing has now been continued to May 28, 2026, with the defendant held without bail.
Murder charges arising from a police pursuit are among the most serious driving-related cases in California criminal law. The legal theories, sentencing exposure, and defense strategy in cases like this can shape a defendant’s life for decades.
What Happened
The Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office filed murder charges on April 3, 2026, against a Pomona man accused of fleeing from police at speeds exceeding 100 mph before broadsiding a vehicle carrying a young couple, killing both occupants and the woman’s unborn child. The case stems from a domestic violence response that escalated into a deadly pursuit through residential Pomona neighborhoods.
According to prosecutors, on April 1, 2026, at approximately 10:11 p.m., officers from the Pomona Police Department were responding to a domestic violence call in the 400 block of East 10th Street. While officers were speaking with the reporting party at the scene, the defendant — Marshall Campbell Judson, 31, of Pomona — allegedly returned to the location in a truck, drove aggressively past the patrol cars, and intentionally reversed into one of them, narrowly missing an officer and the resident who had made the original call.
Judson is then accused of fleeing through a residential area, failing to stop at stop signs, making unsafe turns, briefly crossing double yellow lines into oncoming traffic, and reaching speeds in excess of 100 mph in a posted 35 mph zone. The pursuit ended at the intersection of Garey Avenue and County Road, where Judson’s truck allegedly broadsided a Ford Fusion. The car was occupied by Jennifer Alejandra Loera Zarco, 25, who was 9 months pregnant, and her boyfriend Marc Anthony Trejo Saldivar, 26. Both Loera Zarco and Trejo Saldivar were pronounced dead at the scene. Her unborn child also did not survive.
Following the crash, officers recovered a loaded, unregistered firearm from Judson’s truck. He was charged in case 26PSCF00246 with three counts of murder, three counts of fleeing a pursuing peace officer’s motor vehicle causing death, one count of assault with a deadly weapon upon a peace officer, and one count of carrying a concealed firearm in a vehicle that was loaded and not registered. The case is being prosecuted by Deputy District Attorney Michelle Weiske of the Pomona Branch Office.
At a hearing in early April, the court ordered Judson held without bail. His arraignment was originally scheduled for April 28 in Department N of the Pomona Courthouse but was postponed today to May 28, 2026. If convicted as charged, Judson faces a maximum sentence of 57 years to life in state prison. All defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in court.
Charges Involved
Murder — California Penal Code § 187 (Watson Murder Theory)
When a driver kills someone during reckless or grossly negligent driving, prosecutors can file second-degree murder charges under what is known as a “Watson murder” theory — named after the 1981 California Supreme Court case People v. Watson. The legal foundation is implied malice: the prosecution must prove that the driver knew his conduct was dangerous to human life and chose to do it anyway. Second-degree murder carries 15 years to life in state prison per count. With multiple victims, those terms can be ordered to run consecutively.
Murder of a Human Fetus — Penal Code § 187(a)
California law explicitly defines murder to include the killing of a fetus with malice aforethought. As long as the fetus has progressed beyond the embryonic stage (generally about 7–8 weeks), prosecutors can charge fetal murder as a separate count carrying its own sentence. In this case, the unborn child was reportedly 9 months along — a key fact that supported a third murder count.
Fleeing a Peace Officer Causing Death — Vehicle Code § 2800.3
Under California Vehicle Code § 2800.3(b), evading a pursuing peace officer in a manner that causes death is a felony punishable by 4, 6, or 10 years in state prison. When multiple victims die during the same pursuit, prosecutors typically file separate counts for each death. This statute is often charged alongside murder counts and can run consecutively to the underlying homicide sentence.
Assault With a Deadly Weapon Upon a Peace Officer — Penal Code § 245(c)
Using a vehicle to ram a patrol car constitutes assault with a deadly weapon on a peace officer. The charge is a felony carrying 3, 4, or 5 years in state prison when committed against a peace officer engaged in the performance of duties. Great bodily injury enhancements can add additional time, and the conviction is a “strike” under California’s Three Strikes Law.
Carrying a Concealed and Unregistered Firearm — Penal Code § 25400
Carrying a loaded, concealed firearm in a vehicle is a “wobbler” that can be filed as a felony or misdemeanor. As a felony, it carries up to 3 years in state prison. When the firearm is unregistered or the defendant is not the registered owner, the charge can be elevated and combined with separate ammunition or possession charges. Firearms found at the scene of a violent felony almost always become a major aggravating factor at sentencing.
Total Sentencing Exposure: 57 Years to Life
The 57-years-to-life maximum reflects how California stacks consecutive sentences for multiple victims and multiple distinct offenses. Each victim adds to the total, and the firearms and peace-officer-related counts are typically ordered to run separately. Cases of this magnitude turn heavily on whether prosecutors can prove the elements of implied malice for each murder count — which is often the most heavily contested issue at trial.
What Defendants and Their Families Should Know
If you or a loved one has been arrested in connection with a fatal crash or police pursuit, the most important protection is your right to remain silent. Officers and detectives in vehicular homicide cases are highly trained at building rapport at the scene, in the back of a patrol car, or in the hospital. Statements about how fast you were going, whether you saw the patrol lights, what you had been drinking, or why you fled can become central evidence in a Watson murder prosecution. Politely decline to answer questions and ask for an attorney before any further contact.
Police-pursuit murder cases turn on a combination of physical evidence, vehicle data recorder (“black box”) information, accident reconstruction, and prior driving history. A criminal defense attorney can examine whether the pursuit itself was conducted within department policy, whether the speed and cause-of-collision analysis is accurate, whether the firearm was lawfully discovered, and whether the prosecution can actually prove implied malice for each count. The “implied malice” element — that the defendant subjectively knew the conduct was dangerous to human life — is often the weakest link in a Watson case, and challenging it requires early forensic and investigative work.
Families should also understand what to expect at arraignment. The defendant will be formally advised of the charges, asked to enter a plea (typically not guilty at this stage), and the court will address detention. In multi-victim murder cases involving police pursuits and firearms, defendants are typically held without bail. Loved ones should also avoid discussing case details on jail phone calls, in visiting rooms, or in writing — these communications are recorded and routinely used by prosecutors. Even seemingly innocent statements about a defendant’s emotional state or whereabouts before the incident can become evidence at trial.
Early intervention by counsel matters because these cases involve overlapping investigations — the criminal prosecution, the police department’s internal pursuit review, and any civil claims by the victims’ families. An experienced attorney can engage with prosecutors early, preserve favorable evidence (including patrol vehicle dashcam, body-worn camera, and pursuit-radio audio), identify constitutional issues with searches and statements, and protect the defendant’s options before they narrow. Every defendant remains presumed innocent unless and until the prosecution proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt — and that presumption is the foundation of every criminal defense, no matter how serious the allegations.
Speak With a Criminal Defense Attorney Now
If you or someone you love is facing murder, vehicular manslaughter, or felony evading charges in Pomona or anywhere in Greater Los Angeles, time is critical. Attorney Chris Nalchadjian of KN Law Firm, APLC offers a free consultation and is available 24/7 to review your case and protect your rights. Call (888) 950-0011 to speak with a criminal defense attorney today.
Charged in connection with this case?
Call us immediately for a free, confidential consultation — available 24/7.
