Camacho

People v. Camacho

Good Law
171 Cal. App. 4th 1269·2009 Cal. App. LEXIS 304·90 Cal. Rptr. 3d 559
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 10, 2009B207048California2,142 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kriegler, J.

A verdict form provided to the jury on a charge of robbery mistakenly identified the offense as carjacking. The mistake went unnoticed when the guilty verdict was read and the jury polled, and judgment was imposed as though the jury had returned a verdict of guilty of robbery. Because every stage of this case identified the offense as robbery — the charging document, the opening statement, arguments of counsel, and the jury instructions — we hold the jury’s intent to convict on robbery was unmistakably clear. The clerical error in the verdict form does not affect the validity of the verdict.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Defendant Ramon Domingo Camacho was charged in counts 1 and 3 with carjacking (Pen. Code, § 215, subd. (a)), and in counts 2 and 4 with second degree robbery (§211). Shantal Morris was the alleged victim in counts 1 and 2; her sister, Trechell Patton, was the alleged victim in counts 3 and 4. The jury returned guilty verdicts on all counts, with the verdict form in count 2 mistakenly describing the offense as carjacking instead of second degree robbery. The jury found that defendant personally used a knife within the meaning of section 12022, subdivision (b)(1),…

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.