Pock

People v. Pock

Good Law
19 Cal. App. 4th 1263·1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 1071·23 Cal. Rptr. 2d 900·93 Daily Journal DAR 13672·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8029
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 28, 1993B069312California5,284 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hahn, J.

Procedural History

By an information filed September 7, 1990, appellant and codefendants Phy Chhem, Cheng James Chhem, and David Tam Oum were charged in 12 counts involving murder, robbery, burglary, and forcible rape. After arraignment and entry of plea, appellant’s trial was severed from that of his three codefendants. Appellant’s motion for appointment of cocounsel pursuant to Penal Code section 987.2 was granted.

On March 4, 1992, a second amended information was filed naming only appellant. Appellant was charged with one count of murder (count 1) in violation of section 187, subdivision (a), eight counts of first degree residential robbery (counts 2-8 and 11) in violation of section 211, one count of forcible rape while acting in concert (count 9) in violation of section 264.1, and one count of oral copulation by acting in concert with force (count 10) in violation of section 288a, subdivision (d). As to all 11 counts it was alleged that appellant personally used a firearm within the meaning of section 12022.5 or 12022.3, subdivision (a), as to counts 9 and 10, and that a principal was armed with a firearm within the meaning of section 12022, subdivision (a)(1). As…

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.