Espinosa

People v. Espinosa

Bad Law
177 Cal. Rptr. 3d 887·2014 Cal. App. LEXIS 867·229 Cal. App. 4th 1487
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 25, 2014B249493California5,167 words

Opinion

Opinion

Aldrich, J.

Plaintiff and appellant the People of the State of California appeal from the trial court’s order reducing defendant and respondent Estevan Haro Espinosa’s first degree murder conviction to second degree murder, and resentencing him to a lower term. They contend (1) the court lacked jurisdiction to modify the judgment and (2) even if the court retained jurisdiction, modification of the judgment was improper because sufficient evidence supported the jury’s first degree murder verdict and sentence for that crime did not constitute cruel or unusual punishment. Because the People’s first contention is dispositive, we reinstate the jury’s first degree murder verdict and the original sentence.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

1. Facts

In light of the issues presented on appeal, we summarize the evidence adduced at trial.

a. People’s evidence

The victim, Definido Lopez, was the boyfriend of appellant Espinosa’s mother, Ebelia Haro, and they had lived together for approximately eight years. In March 2012 Lopez, Haro, appellant Espinosa, Espinosa’s younger brother, 18-year-old Asahel, and his younger sister, 16-year-old D., had recently moved to a small apartment. D. and…

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.