Forrester

People v. Forrester

Good Law
1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 1278·30 Cal. App. 4th 1697·37 Cal. Rptr. 2d 19·94 Daily Journal DAR 17915·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9675
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 20, 1994C016666California1,997 words

Opinion

Opinion

Puglia, J.

In a joint trial with codefendant Mark Regó, a jury convicted defendant of second degree burglary (Pen. Code, §§ 459, 460) and failure to appear (Pen. Code, § 1320, subd. (b)). Defendant was sentenced to state prison for the two-year middle term for burglary, plus eight months consecutive for failure to appear.

On appeal, defendant contends that an instruction to the jury in terms of the presumption contained in Penal Code section 1320, subdivision (b) unconstitutionally subverts the presumption of innocence and invades the province of the jury. The court instructed that “it should [sic] be presumed that a defendant who willfully fails to appear within 14 days of the date assigned for his or her appearance intended to evade the process of the court." In the published part of this opinion we shall hold that the statute, to the extent it mandates such an instruction, is constitutionally infirm, but that the instruction did not prejudice defendant.

Defendant makes numerous other contentions of error all of which we reject in the unpublished part of this opinion. Accordingly, we shall affirm the judgment.

Defendant was arrested and charged with burglary. He was released on…

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.