Elliott
People v. Elliott
Opinion
Opinion
Timlin, J.
Defendant appeals from his conviction by jury of one count of second degree robbery (Pen. Code, §§ 211, 212.5, subd. (b))—attended by a true finding (the truth of which had been admitted by defendant) that he had suffered a prior conviction of a serious felony within the meaning of section 667, subdivision (a).
On appeal, defendant raises only one contention: The trial court erred prejudicially by refusing to instruct the jury, at defendant’s request, as to the asserted lesser related offense of being an accessory (either to a robbery or to a “lesser included” grand theft). We shall conclude that the trial court did not err in refusing to give the instruction in question and, consequently, we shall affirm in full the judgment entered below.
Facts
At approximately 8 p.m. in the evening of January 30, 1991, Lucy Villapondo (Villapondo) had completed her shopping at the Redlands K-Mart and was returning to her car in the K-Mart parking lot. As she returned to her car, she noticed defendant and a woman (later identified as, and hereinafter referred to as, Powels) sitting on a parking lot “island” curb next to her car.