People v. Bradder CA2/4

INTRODUCTION

Defendant Ross Alan Bradder was convicted by jury of one count of embezzlement and acquitted on six counts of forgery. The jury rejected the special allegations seeking sentencing enhancements for taking property worth more than $200,000 or, alternatively, $65,000. On appeal from his embezzlement conviction, defendant contends the trial court erred in failing to give two jury instructions sua sponte: a unanimity instruction regarding the multiple acts which allegedly constituted embezzlement and an instruction regarding the statute of limitations. We find the failure to give a unanimity instruction under the circumstances of this case was prejudicial error. We therefore reverse the judgment.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

I. Procedural Background

Defendant was charged by information with one count of embezzlement (Pen. Code, §504 (count 1))1 and six counts of forgery (§470, subd. (a) (counts 2 through 7)). The information further specially alleged as to count one that defendant took property with a value exceeding $200,000 (§12022.6, subd. (a)(2)) or, alternatively, $100,000 (1203.045, subd. (a)).2 After a six day trial, the jury found defendant guilty of…