The People v. Navarro CA2/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 12, 2013B234703California10,129 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND

Viewed in accordance with the usual rule of appellate review (People v. Ochoa (1993) 6 Cal.4th 1199, 1206), the trial evidence established the following. 1. The trial evidence. a. The prosecution’s case-in-chief. At about 2:00 a.m. on May 6, 2009, following Cinco de Mayo celebrations, brothers Miguel Keener (Keener) and David Sandoval (Sandoval) walked their cousin, Maritza Toscano (Toscano), and Keener’s girlfriend, Cynthia Vasquez (Cynthia V.), to Cynthia V.’s Honda. During the evening, they had been celebrating with others in the

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated. In 2009, section 245 provided that both assault with a deadly weapon, other than with a firearm, and assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury were the crimes proscribed in subdivision (a)(1) of that section. (Stats. 2004, ch. 494 (A.B.50), § 1.) Subsequently, section 245 was amended to provide that assault with a deadly weapon other than a firearm was the crime proscribed in subdivision (a)(1) and that assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury was the crime proscribed in subdivision (a)(4). The punishment for…

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.