Rojas

People v. Rojas

Good Law
11 Cal. App. 4th 950·14 Cal. Rptr. 2d 318·1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 1436·92 Daily Journal DAR 16765·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10066
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 14, 1992B056299California2,803 words

Opinion

Opinion

Woods, J.

Charge with special circumstance murder (Pen. Code,1 §§ 187, 190.2, subd. (a)(15) [lying in wait], 190.2, subd. (a)(17) [robbery], 190.2, subd. (a)(17) [burglary]; count I), robbery (§§ 211, 12022, subd. (a); count II), and burglary (§§ 459, 12022, subd. (a); count III) a jury found appellant guilty of first degree robbery (count II), first degree burglary (count III) and accessory after the fact (§ 32), a lesser related offense to murder (count I). The jury found the robbery firearm allegation (§ 12022, subd. (a)) true but the burglary firearm allegation (§ 12022, subd. (a)) not true. Appellant was sentenced to state prison for seven years.

Appellant contends Wheeler error (People v. Wheeler (1978) 22 Cal.3d 258 [ 148 Cal.Rptr. 890 , 583 P.2d 748 ]) and the erroneous admission of hearsay evidence require reversal. He also claims sentencing error. Except for failure to stay a concurrent burglary sentence, we find no error and, as modified, affirm the judgment.

Factual Background

There being no insufficiency of evidence claim, the facts may be stated simply.

A friend of appellant’s, Evan Nakahara (Evan), had an intermittent personal relationship with Beatrice Viveiros…

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.