A gamer traveled to California, prosecutors said, then watched the victims’ movements and used a delivery disguise to enter their home.

SALINAS, Calif. — A Canadian man who posed as an Amazon delivery worker before attacking a woman he met through online gaming and her boyfriend has been sentenced to two consecutive life terms, ending the main prosecution in a case built around international travel, surveillance and deception.

Devin Wolfgang Vanderhoef, 26, of North Vancouver, British Columbia, was sentenced June 25 by Monterey County Superior Court Judge Mark E. Hood. A jury convicted him in February of two counts of willful, deliberate and premeditated attempted murder and one count of residential burglary. Jurors also found that Vanderhoef personally inflicted great bodily injury and personally used a weapon during the crimes. Hood added five consecutive years to the two life sentences because of those findings, according to the Monterey County District Attorney’s Office.

The sentence reflected the prosecution’s position that the violence was not a sudden confrontation. Authorities said Vanderhoef flew from Canada to Monterey County in November 2024, bought knives, handcuffs and duct tape, and watched the woman’s home and workplace. He then carried a package to her residence and pretended to be an Amazon delivery worker. Prosecutors said the familiar delivery identity gave him a reason to stand at the door without immediately revealing why he had traveled to California.

Vanderhoef had met the woman through online video gaming. Public statements from authorities do not identify the game, the service they used or the content of their communications. Law enforcement described him in early accounts as having developed a yearslong obsession with her. Prosecutors later focused on the immediate preparations for the attack, saying Vanderhoef admitted that he had spent about a month planning it before flying south. The district attorney’s office said he confessed that his plan was to “actually kill someone.”

The woman’s boyfriend opened the door when Vanderhoef arrived with the apparent delivery. Vanderhoef then forced his way into the home and began stabbing him, causing injuries that prosecutors described as great bodily injury. The woman grabbed a sharp metal object and tried to protect her boyfriend, according to the initial sheriff’s investigation. During the struggle, Vanderhoef stabbed and strangled her. Officials have not publicly identified either victim or released detailed information about their treatment and recovery.

Both victims managed to get out of the residence, but Vanderhoef followed them and continued the attack, prosecutors said. The boyfriend eventually disarmed him and stabbed him repeatedly during the struggle. Vanderhoef suffered serious wounds but remained able to pursue the woman as she tried to return inside. Authorities said he tackled her and strangled her until she could not breathe. The restrained public accounts do not specify how long that part of the assault lasted or who stopped it.

Several emergency calls brought deputies and medical workers to the area on the night of Nov. 25, 2024. The woman, her boyfriend and Vanderhoef were taken to a hospital. Early sheriff’s reports described the boyfriend and Vanderhoef as critically injured and the woman as moderately injured. The victims survived, changing the case from a homicide investigation into a prosecution for two attempted killings. Their survival also made Vanderhoef’s stated intent and his conduct before the attack central to the case.

Investigators found handcuffs, duct tape and knives connected to the package Vanderhoef had carried to the door. Shortly after the arrests, the sheriff’s office said investigators did not yet know exactly how every item was intended to be used. Prosecutors later cited the purchases as evidence that Vanderhoef had prepared in advance. The jury was not required to determine a separate intended use for each object before deciding whether the attempted murders were planned.

The case instead presented jurors with a sequence of actions. Vanderhoef traveled from another country, acquired weapons and restraint materials, observed locations connected to the woman and adopted a false identity before approaching her home. He continued attacking after both victims fled the residence. Prosecutors also offered his reported confession about planning to kill someone. Taken together, those details supported the allegation that he had formed an intent to kill before the boyfriend opened the door.

The verdict treated the two victims separately. One attempted murder count concerned the boyfriend, who was attacked first after answering the door. The second concerned the woman, who was assaulted while defending her boyfriend and again while trying to escape. By ordering the life sentences to run consecutively, the judge imposed one term after the other rather than allowing both to be served at the same time. The county’s sentencing announcement did not provide Vanderhoef’s first possible parole date. The residential burglary conviction addressed Vanderhoef’s entry into the home. Burglary can involve entering a residence with the intent to commit a felony, even when theft is not alleged. Prosecutors said Vanderhoef used the delivery disguise to approach the house and then forced his way inside before beginning the attack. Amazon was not accused of involvement. Authorities said Vanderhoef used the company’s identity as part of the false presentation at the door.

A second Canadian man, Darius Avery Whyte, traveled with Vanderhoef and became a significant witness in the prosecution. Investigators initially contacted Whyte near the scene. He claimed that he did not know what had happened, and authorities did not immediately keep him in custody. The investigation later concluded that Whyte knew Vanderhoef’s intentions and had acted as an accomplice. Deputies arrested him the following morning aboard a plane at San Jose Mineta International Airport as he prepared to return to Canada.

Whyte’s case was resolved through a plea agreement rather than a trial. He pleaded guilty to assault by means of force likely to cause great bodily injury and to being an accessory after the fact to a felony. He was sentenced April 3 and testified against Vanderhoef. The county’s public announcements do not disclose Whyte’s complete sentence or describe all the actions prosecutors attributed to him. His testimony nevertheless gave jurors an account from a person who had accompanied Vanderhoef on the trip.

The charges changed as the case developed. Early reports listed allegations against Vanderhoef that included attempted murder, conspiracy, mayhem, stalking and burglary. Whyte initially faced attempted murder and conspiracy allegations. Prosecutors later moved forward with the charges they believed the evidence supported, while Whyte accepted reduced charges in his plea. Vanderhoef ultimately went to trial on the counts that led to two attempted murder convictions and the residential burglary conviction.

The jury’s premeditation findings were especially important. An attempted murder conviction requires proof that a defendant intended to kill and took a direct but unsuccessful step toward doing so. The additional findings that the crimes were willful, deliberate and premeditated meant jurors concluded that Vanderhoef acted after planning and reflection. The purchases, surveillance, travel and disguise gave the prosecution evidence of preparation beyond what occurred during the struggle itself.

Vanderhoef’s reported statement supplied another part of the intent evidence. The district attorney’s office said he confessed that he had planned the attack for about a month and wanted to kill someone. Authorities have not released a complete recording or transcript of that confession, so it is not publicly known what questions preceded the statement or what other explanation he offered. The quoted language was included in the county’s conviction and sentencing announcements.

The victims’ resistance changed the immediate outcome. They escaped from the house, continued defending themselves outside and disarmed Vanderhoef. No public report indicates that the boyfriend was charged for injuring Vanderhoef during the struggle. Investigators and prosecutors treated the couple as victims responding to an ongoing attack that began after Vanderhoef forced his way into their home and continued after they tried to flee.

The county’s public record leaves several personal details private. Officials have not released the victims’ names, their current medical conditions or their own descriptions of the attack. Authorities also have not explained how Vanderhoef learned the addresses of the woman’s home and workplace, how long he watched either location or whether the victims knew he had traveled to California before he appeared at the door. Those unanswered questions did not prevent the jury from reaching a verdict on the charged crimes. Prosecutors were required to prove the elements of attempted murder and burglary, not every part of the relationship or every hour of Vanderhoef’s trip. The jury found that he intended to kill both victims, took direct steps toward that goal and entered the residence as part of the plan. The weapon and injury findings supported additional punishment.

The case was investigated by Monterey County Sheriff’s Detective Arras Wilson. Sheriff Tina Nieto credited detectives and prosecutors after sentencing and said the case showed how online contact can carry consequences in the physical world. Her statement addressed the broader setting in which Vanderhoef first met the woman, but the criminal judgment remained focused on his individual conduct and the evidence presented in court.

With Vanderhoef sentenced and Whyte’s plea case completed, the principal prosecutions arising from the November 2024 attack have reached their announced conclusions. No additional defendant has been publicly identified, and the sentencing release did not list another trial-level hearing. Vanderhoef now stands convicted of attempting to kill two people after traveling from Canada and gaining access to their home through a false delivery claim.

The victims survived the planned attack, and the court imposed a separate consecutive life term for each attempted killing. The five additional years reflect the jury’s findings that Vanderhoef personally used a weapon and caused serious injury. Any future appellate proceeding was not identified in the county’s public announcement.

Author note: Last updated July 27, 2026.