People v. Rushing CA2/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 27, 2025B334988California3,228 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. Facts2

On the evening of October 5, 2007, Gregory Powe was driving with his 13-year-old foster son, R.R. Twenty to 25 gang members were celebrating the Hood Day of the Fudge Town Mafia Crips in the intersection of 105th Street and Lou Dillon Avenue in Los Angeles. They blocked the way for Powe to drive. Powe got out of the car and asked them to move. Rushing and his fellow gang member Nakia Hubbard started beating Powe with their hands and feet. Powe tried to get back inside his car, but Hubbard stopped him. Hubbard kicked Powe in the face and

All further statutory references are to the Penal Code. Effective June 30, 2022, section 1170.95 was renumbered section 1172.6 with no change in text. (Stats. 2022, ch. 58, § 10.)

We refer to the factual background from the Court of Appeal opinion in People v. Rushing (2011) 197 Cal.App.4th 801 (Rushing), which affirmed the judgment of conviction. These facts are “for background purposes and to provide context for the parties’ arguments.” (People v. Flores (2022) 76 Cal.App.5th 974, 978, fn. 2.) We do not rely on these facts to review the trial court’s determination for Rushing’s prima facie showing. (Id. at p. 988.)

2…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.