People v. Deen CA5

INTRODUCTION

Defendant Vincent Alexander Deen and his friend, Jamar Mayo, burglarized the home of 68-year-old, Jennie Molina.1 During the course of the burglary, Jennie was gagged and bound at the hands and legs. Deen and Mayo then carried her from the house to an attached garage and placed her in the trunk of her car. Defendant contends this movement of the victim was “merely incidental” (Pen. Code, § 209, subd. (b)(2))2 to the robbery, and therefore his conviction for aggravated kidnapping must be reversed. We disagree. There was substantial evidence that the movement of the victim was not necessary to complete the burglary. Since “ ‘[a] movement unnecessary to a robbery is not incidental to it at all[,]’ ” the jury had a sufficient basis to conclude the movement here was not merely incidental. (People v. Leavel (2012) 203 Cal.App.4th 823, 835.) We order a minor correction to the abstract of judgment, and affirm.

BACKGROUND

Defendant was charged with kidnapping to commit robbery (count 1 – § 209, subd. (b)(1)), elder abuse (count 2 – § 368, subd. (b)(1)), first degree residential robbery (count 3 – § 211), first degree residential burglary (count 4 – §§ 459/460, subd. (a)),…