SOTELLO

People v. SOTELLO

Good Law
115 Cal. Rptr. 2d 118·2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 21·2002 Daily Journal DAR 149·94 Cal. App. 4th 1349·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 125
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 7, 2002F035027California2,724 words

Opinion

Opinion

Cornell, J.

Appellant Isaac Sotello (Sotello) was convicted of receiving stolen property. Allegations that he had committed one prior serious felony within the meaning of the three strikes law and that he had committed a felony within five years of prison confinement also were found true. Sotello appeals his conviction alleging there was insufficient evidence to support a jury finding of guilty. He also alleges the trial court erred when: 1) it did not give jury instructions concerning eyewitness testimony; and 2) it did give instructions regarding juror misconduct. Sotello appeals his sentence alleging that there was insufficient evidence to support a true finding that he had committed a prior strike felony. We will affirm Sotello’s conviction, reverse the true finding of his prior strike and remand for further proceedings.

Procedural Summary

Sotello was charged by information with receiving stolen property, a felony violation of Penal Code section 496, subdivision (a). It also was alleged that Sotello had suffered one strike prior within the meaning of the three strikes law, sections 1170.12, subdivisions (a) through (d) and 667, subdivisions (b) through (i). It was further…

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.