Ortega

People v. Ortega

Good Law
101 Cal. Rptr. 2d 253·2000 Cal. App. LEXIS 836·2000 Daily Journal DAR 11585·84 Cal. App. 4th 659·2000 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8744
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 31, 2000A087932California4,055 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kline, J.

Introduction

Bismark Ortega appeals from a judgment of the San Mateo County Superior Court following a jury trial. He was convicted of attempted voluntary manslaughter, assault with a firearm, and finding true various related enhancements. He argues that the trial court abused its discretion at sentencing in refusing to dismiss one of the convictions pursuant to Penal Code section 1385, leaving him with two strikes under the “Three Strikes” law, where the. court found that both convictions arose from a single act and stayed sentence on the assault with a firearm conviction pursuant to Penal Code section 654. He also contends: that the use of the phrase “the People” to refer to the prosecution violated his constitutional right to due process and a fair trial and that the reasonable doubt instruction (CALJIC No. 2.90 (1994 rev.)) is unconstitutional. We shall affirm the judgment.

Combined Statement of the Case and Facts

On November 22, 1997, appellant Bismark Ortega shot Roderick Eugenio five times in front of a Denny’s restaurant in South San Francisco. Appellant was convicted following a jury trial of two felony offenses of attempted voluntary manslaughter (Pen. Code,…

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.