Hernandez

People v. Hernandez

Bad Law
16 Cal. Rptr. 3d 880·2004 Cal. LEXIS 7235·2004 Daily Journal DAR 9739·33 Cal. 4th 1040·94 P.3d 1080
Supreme Court of CaliforniaAugust 9, 2004S117651California4,817 words

Opinion

Opinion

Chin, J.

The punishment for certain crimes can be enhanced if the crime involves a criminal street gang. (Pen. Code, § 186.22, subd. (b)(1); see generally People v. Gardeley (1996) 14 Cal.4th 605 [ 59 Cal.Rptr.2d 356 , 927 P.2d 713 ].) To establish this criminal street gang enhancement, the prosecution must prove some facts in addition to the elements of the underlying crime, for example, that the criminal street gang has engaged in a “pattern of criminal gang activity.” (§ 186.22, subds. (e) and (f).) Accordingly, when the prosecution charges the criminal street gang enhancement, it will often present evidence that would be inadmissible in a trial limited to the charged offense. We have held that a trial court may bifurcate trial of a prior conviction from trial of the charged offense. (People v. Calderon (1994) 9 Cal.4th 69 [ 36 Cal.Rptr.2d 333 , 885 P.2d 83 ] (Calderon).) Defendants contend the court here should similarly have bifurcated trial of the gang enhancement from trial of the charged offense. They also contend the court should at least have given a limiting instruction regarding the permissible uses the jury could make of evidence admitted solely to support the…

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.