Coleman

People v. Coleman

Bad Law
146 Cal. App. 4th 1363·2007 Cal. App. LEXIS 77·2007 Daily Journal DAR 1054·53 Cal. Rptr. 3d 505·2007 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 826
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 23, 2007B186264California4,028 words

Opinion

Opinion

Todd, J.

Appellant Christopher Coleman appeals from a judgment entered after a jury found him guilty of carjacking in violation of Penal Code section 215, subdivision (a) (count 1) and second degree robbery in violation of section 211 (count 2). The jury found true the allegations that appellant personally used a firearm in the commission of each offense. (§ 12022.53, subd. (b).) Appellant contends that there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction for carjacking because the victim did not have actual or constructive possession of the vehicle.

We reverse appellant’s conviction under section 215. We conclude that the purpose of that statute is not served by applying it under these circumstances, where the victim’s only connection to her employer’s stolen automobile was her ability to access the automobile’s keys left in her office of employment. Section 215 was designed to address “a particularly serious crime that victimizes persons in vulnerable settings and, because of the nature of the taking, raises a serious potential for harm to the victim, the perpetrator and the public at large.” (People v. Antoine (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 489, 495 [ 56 Cal.Rptr.2d 530 ].)…

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.