The People v. Ribera CA4/3

INTRODUCTION

Defendants Luis Angeleo Cespedes Ribera and Efren Izquierdo were convicted of conspiracy to carjack a vehicle, robbery, and street terrorism. On appeal, Ribera and Izquierdo raise several arguments challenging their convictions. Finding no merit in any of those arguments, we affirm the judgment as modified, to correct two clerical errors, as to Ribera, and we affirm the judgment as to Izquierdo. First, both Ribera and Izquierdo argue there was not sufficient evidence to support the conviction for conspiracy to carjack. We conclude that the evidence and the reasonable inferences to be drawn from that evidence were more than sufficient. Second, Ribera argues there was not sufficient evidence to support his conviction for robbery. However, circumstantial evidence supports the jury‟s finding that Ribera was guilty of robbery as an aider and abettor. Third, Ribera and Izquierdo argue the trial court erred by overruling their objections to opinion testimony by the prosecution‟s gang expert. Under recent California Supreme Court authority, the gang expert properly testified that if the actions were performed in the manner described in a hypothetical question, those actions…