Scott

People v. Scott

Good Law
113 Cal. App. 3d 190·169 Cal. Rptr. 669·1980 Cal. App. LEXIS 2534
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 12, 1980Crim. 20232California3,426 words

Opinion

Opinion

Caldecott, J.

Codefendants Jarrón Scott and Ronald McGee were convicted of robbery (Pen. Code, § 211). Both appealed; McGee’s appeal was subsequently dismissed under California Rules of Court, rule 17(a). Scott contends that a trial court ruling which permitted the People to prove, in rebuttal, that Scott had previously been convicted of a different robbery constituted reversible error in and of itself and also wrongfully compelled Scott to relinquish his right to remain silent. We find that the trial court’s ruling was both substantively and procedurally proper. Therefore we affirm.

The broad outlines of the fact situation were not disputed: Late in the evening, on Third Street in the Bay View district of San Francisco, Scott and McGee became involved in a physical confrontation with one Opelousas, and blows were struck on both sides. Police arrived while the parties were still struggling. Opelousas accused Scott and McGee of stealing his wallet. Opelousas’ wallet was found in Scott’s pocket. Both Scott and McGee were arrested.

Opelousas testified that he had been walking home from a grocery store when he was pushed into a doorway where McGee repeatedly struck him while Scott…

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.