Mullins

People v. Mullins

Good Law
1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 679·6 Cal. App. 4th 1216·8 Cal. Rptr. 2d 289·92 Daily Journal DAR 7049·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4478
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 26, 1992A051015California2,463 words

Opinion

Opinion

Chin, J.

Blaine Corey Mullins appeals after the court convicted him of robbery (Pen. Code, § 211) and attempted kidnapping for the purpose of robbery (§§ 664, 209, subd. (b)). The court sentenced him to 10 years in state prison, to be served concurrently with a 57-year term imposed in a separate criminal action.

On appeal, he contends that his conviction of an attempt to violate section 209, subdivision (b) (kidnapping for purpose of robbery), was error because a completed kidnapping is a necessary element of that offense. We conclude that a defendant may be convicted of an attempt to violate section 209, subdivision (b), where the kidnapping is thwarted by the victim’s escape. Consequently, we affirm the judgment.

Facts

On December 10, 1989, at approximately 7:50 p.m., Elizabeth L. returned to her car in the parking lot of the Tanforan shopping center. When she got into her car, she placed her purse on the passenger side floor. As she was about to start the engine, appellant walked toward her shouting, “Lady, you dropped something. You dropped something.” Instinctively, Elizabeth moved to lock her doors, but before she could do so, appellant opened the driver’s door and forced…

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.