Snead

People v. Snead

Bad Law
1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 1221·20 Cal. App. 4th 1088·24 Cal. Rptr. 2d 922·93 Daily Journal DAR 15469·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9046
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 7, 1993B055658California2,457 words

Opinion

Opinion

Woods, J.

Convicted by jury of first degree murder (Pen. Code, §§ 187, 189; count I) with two special circumstances found true (§ 190.2, subds. (a)(6) and (a)(17)), arson causing great bodily injury (§ 451, subd. (a); count II), arson of an inhabited structure (§451, subd. (b); count III), explosion of a destructive device causing death (§ 12310, subd. (a); count IV), and explosion of a destructive device causing bodily injury (§ 12309, count V) appellant contends the trial court committed instructional errors and the evidence is insufficient to sustain one of the special circumstances (“delivery” of a destructive device, § 190.2, subd. (a)(6)). We find no prejudicial error and affirm the judgment.

Factual Background

There being no insufficiency of evidence claim (except concerning a special circumstance), we synopsize the evidence. Our perspective favors the judgment. (People v. Barnes (1986) 42 Cal.3d 284, 303-304 [ 228 Cal.Rptr. 228 , 721 P.2d 110 ].)

Three people were involved in the subject offenses. Each was tried separately. The evidence at appellant’s trial, concerning the offenses, duplicated that of one of his confederates. On his appeal we provided this summary: “It…

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.