People v. Williams

Defendant Anthony Williams was charged with burglary (Pen. Code, § 459) 1 and robbery (§ 211), with special allegations that he personally used a firearm (§ 12022.53, subd. (b)) in the commission of the offenses. The jury convicted him of burglary and found the gun allegation to be true, but acquitted him of the robbery. 2

Sentenced to an aggregate term of eight years in state prison, defendant appeals. The issue in this case is whether a defendant charged with burglary on an aiding and abetting theory with a target crime of larceny is entitled to have the jury instructed on the claim-of-right defense, where there is substantial evidence that the defendant, in good faith, believed the property taken from the victim belonged to his coprincipal.

We agree with defendant that the trial court erred in refusing a claim-of-right instruction, but find the error to be harmless. Thus, we shall affirm the judgment.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

On the evening of August 27, 2007, Marlene Ayers (Marlene) and her three female cousins, including Johneshia Daniels, were all gathered at Daniels’s apartment in Rio Linda. Around 10:00 p.m. there was a knock on the door. Marlene asked, “Who is it?”…

I concur in the majority opinion.

I write separately to explain the counterintuitive proposition that defendant was entitled to a claim-of-right defense instruction even though he used a gun in his attempt to reclaim his brother’s car.

In People v. Butler (1967) 65 Cal.2d 569 [ 55 Cal.Rptr. 511 , 421 P.2d 703 ] (Butler), the defendant, armed with a handgun, went to his employer’s home to try to collect wages due the defendant for catering work. (id. at p. 571.) During an altercation, the defendant shot and killed his employer with the handgun. (Id. at pp. 571-572.) The defendant was convicted of felony murder. (Id. at p. 571.)

In an opinion by Chief Justice Traynor, a majority of the Supreme Court held that the trial court erroneously allowed the prosecutor to argue that a claim-of-right defense did not exist in these circumstances. ( Butler, supra, 65 Cal.2d 569, 572 .)

In People v. Tufunga (1999) 21 Cal.4th 935 [ 90 Cal.Rptr.2d 143 , 987 P.2d 168 ], the court disapproved People v. Butler, supra, 65 Cal.2d 569 , to the extent it allowed a claim-of-right defense to collect a debt. (Tufunga, supra, at pp. 953-954 .) However, the Tufunga court held that Butler is still viable…

Defendant Anthony Williams was charged with burglary (Pen. Code, § 459) [1] and robbery (§ 211), with special allegations that he personally used a firearm (§ 12022.53, subd. (b)) in the commission of the offenses. The jury convicted him of burglary and found the gun allegation to be true, but acquitted him of the robbery. [2]

Sentenced to an aggregate term of eight years in state prison, defendant appeals. The issue in this case is whether a defendant charged with burglary on an aiding and abetting theory with a target crime of larceny is entitled to have the jury instructed on the claim-of-right defense, where there is substantial evidence that the defendant, in good faith, believed the property taken from the victim belonged to his coprincipal.

We agree with defendant that the trial court erred in refusing a claim-of-right instruction, but find the error to be harmless. Thus, we shall affirm the judgment.

On the evening of August 27, 2007, Marlene Ayers (Marlene) and her three female cousins, including Johneshia Daniels, were all gathered at Daniels's apartment in Rio Linda. Around 10:00 p.m. there was a knock on the door. Marlene asked, "Who is it?" and defendant…