MUTUMA

People v. MUTUMA

Good Law
144 Cal. App. 4th 635·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 1721·2006 Daily Journal DAR 14585·50 Cal. Rptr. 3d 547·2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10214
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 1, 2006F048799California3,179 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wiseman, J.

Defendant Joshua Marete Mutuma challenges his conviction under Vehicle Code section 2800.2 for felony evasion of a peace officer by car. He claims that the court did not properly submit to the jury the question of whether three traffic violations committed during the evasion showed willful and wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property, elevating the crime to felony status. We disagree. Following a recent decision of this court, we first hold that any three violations for which points are assessed against the driver’s license under section 12810 are predicate offenses under section 2800.2 as a matter of law, so no jury findings were called for on that issue. Second, we address a question of first impression: If the claimed predicate offenses are not enumerated in section 12810 but arguably fall into a catchall provision of that section (subd. (f)), assessing one point for all violations “involving the safe operation of a motor vehicle upon the highway,” must the jury decide whether the claimed predicate offenses satisfy that description, or is that a question of law for the judge? Our answer is that this is a question of law and there is no need for a jury…

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.