People v. Superior Court (Clark)

Good Law
1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 180·22 Cal. App. 4th 1541·28 Cal. Rptr. 2d 46·94 Daily Journal DAR 2708·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1594
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 28, 1994G014522California3,777 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sills, J.

(Pen. Code, § 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(i) & (vii)) against the three “non-shooter defendants” on the ground that Proposition 115 could not be. applied to crimes committed after its passage but before the California Supreme Court’s decision in Yoshisato v. Superior Court (1992) 2 Cal.4th 978 [ 9 Cal.Rptr.2d 102 , 831 P.2d 327 ] (which held Proposition 115 was effective). Because we conclude the provisions of Proposition 115 apply to crimes committed after its passage and before Yoshisato was decided, we grant the People’s petition and direct the trial court to deny the motion to dismiss.

I

Defendants (and real parties in interest) William Clark, Eric Clark and Damian Wilson are each charged with one count of murder. According to the indictment, on October 18, 1991, codefendant Nokkuwa Ervin (who is not a party to this proceeding) entered a Comp USA computer store in Fountain Valley during regular business hours and hid inside. After the store closed, Ervin confronted the store’s employees at gunpoint and took personal property from them. Meanwhile, defendants drove up in a U-Haul truck. As Ervin and defendants were beginning to remove computer equipment from the store, the…

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.