Flores

People v. Flores

Good Law
1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 871·7 Cal. App. 4th 1350·9 Cal. Rptr. 2d 754·92 Daily Journal DAR 9538·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6063
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 8, 1992B052866California9,144 words

Opinion

Concurring Opinion

Johnson, J.

I concur in the judgment and write separately only to emphasize I do so solely because I agree appellant did not adequately preserve his objections to the rather sweeping testimony of the “gang expert.” Had the proper objections been made at the appropriate times, they would have raised serious questions about the admissibility of certain aspects of that testimony.

A petition for a rehearing was denied July 29, 1992.

Lead Opinion

Woods, J.

Convicted by jury of second degree murder (Pen. Code 1 § 187, subd. (a)), two counts of attempted murder (§§ 664/187, subd. (a))—each committed with a firearm (§ 12022, subd. (a)(1))—and accessory after the fact (§ 32), appellant contends admitting gang expert testimony and instructional errors require reversal. We find no prejudicial error and affirm.

Procedural and Factual Background

There being no insufficiency of evidence claim, we summarize the evidence and do so with a perspective favoring the judgment. (People v. Barnes (1986) 42 Cal.3d 284, 303-304 [ 228 Cal.Rptr. 228 , 721 P.2d 110 ].)

*1354 This is a gang, drive-by shooting case. The victims lived in Lynwood, Banning Street Gang territory. The perpetrators were members of a rival gang from Compton, the Bario Los Padrenos (BLP) Gang.

The events occurred Christmas Eve, December 24, 1989. Appellant, 19‘A years old and a member of BLP, went to a party in Compton. But, finding it boring, he left about 9 p.m. with another gang member, Raymond Vasquez. The two had been friends for three years afid lived on the same block. Raymond, about 17 years old, had been a gang member for at least 3 years and was called…

Opinion

WOODS (Fred), J.

Convicted by jury of second degree murder (Pen. Code [1] § 187, subd. (a)), two counts of attempted murder (§§ 664/187, subd. (a)) — each committed with a firearm (§ 12022, subd. (a)(1)) — and accessory after the fact (§ 32), appellant contends admitting gang expert testimony and instructional errors require reversal. We find no prejudicial error and affirm.

There being no insufficiency of evidence claim, we summarize the evidence and do so with a perspective favoring the judgment. ( People v. Barnes (1986) 42 Cal.3d 284, 303-304 [ 228 Cal. Rptr. 228 , 721 P.2d 110 ].)

This is a gang, drive-by shooting case. The victims lived in Lynwood, Banning Street Gang territory. The perpetrators were members of a rival gang from Compton, the Bario Los Padrenos (BLP) Gang.

The events occurred Christmas Eve, December 24, 1989. Appellant, 19 1/2 years old and a member of BLP, went to a party in Compton. But, finding it boring, he left about 9 p.m. with another gang member, Raymond Vasquez. The two had been friends for three years and lived on the same block. Raymond, about 17 years old, had been a gang member for at least 3 years and was called "Little Man."…

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.