Hustead

People v. Hustead

Bad Law
1999 Cal. App. LEXIS 772·74 Cal. App. 4th 410·87 Cal. Rptr. 2d 875·99 Daily Journal DAR 8661·99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6850
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 20, 1999F029647California5,344 words

Opinion

Opinion

Appellant, Zane Ira Hustead, was charged with felony evasion of arrest (Veh. Code, § 2800.2), and resisting arrest (Pen. Code, § 148), on August 19, 1997. It was further alleged that appellant had suffered two prior convictions within the meaning of Penal Code sections 667, subdivisions (c) through (j) and 1170.12, subdivisions (a) through (e). Appellant pled not guilty to both counts and denied the allegations.

On August 28, 1997, appellant made a Pitchess motion. At the hearing on the motion, the prosecution moved to dismiss the resisting arrest charge in furtherance of justice. The trial court then denied the Pitchess motion.

After a trial by jury, appellant was convicted of felony evasion of arrest. In a bifurcated proceeding the jury found appellant’s prior convictions true.

Appellant was sentenced to 25 years to life under the “Three Strikes” law. Appellant subsequently filed a timely notice of appeal.

On appeal, appellant claims numerous instructional errors, prosecutorial misconduct, that the trial court erroneously denied his Pitchess motion, that he was denied a fair trial, and that there was insufficient evidence to support the verdict. We…

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.