Ervin

People v. Ervin

Good Law
1997 Cal. App. LEXIS 247·53 Cal. App. 2d 1323·53 Cal. App. 4th 1323·62 Cal. Rptr. 2d 231·97 Daily Journal DAR 4340
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 28, 1997B099627California2,458 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kitching, J.

Introduction

Robbery is classified as either first or second degree. Under current law, all robberies are of the second degree unless otherwise specified by statute. (Pen. Code, § 212.5, subd. (c).) The Legislature has determined that when a victim is robbed while using or immediately after using an automated teller machine (ATM), and the victim is in the vicinity of the ATM, that robbery will be in the first degree. (Pen. Code, § 212.5, subd. (b).)

Appellant Lavan Ervin appeals from the judgment convicting him of a violation of Penal Code sections 211 and 212.5, subdivision (b). The trial court also found Ervin had suffered a prior serious felony conviction within the meaning of Penal Code section 667, subdivisions (a) to (i). Ervin was sentenced to 17 years in state prison.

Ervin contends Penal Code section 212.5, subdivision (b) is unconstitutionally vague and, even if the statute is not unconstitutional, there was insufficient evidence to prove he knew the victim had just used an ATM prior to the robbery. We reject these contentions and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Facts

Viewed in accordance with the usual rule of appellate review (People v. Ochoa…

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.