People v. Devalle CA1/2

BACKGROUND

The basic contours of the events on the evening of October 16, 2013 are not disputed. Nicolas Parker was talking on his cell phone while heading for a BART train at the Powell Street Station. Defendant approached, yelling at Parker in a manner and tone Parker characterized as “belligerent,” and which a bystander described as “antagonizing.” Parker had his wallet in his hand because “I was about to get on the BART,” when defendant struck Parker in the face.

2 The statute which defines the offense of receiving “any property that has been stolen or that has been obtained in any manner constituting theft” also provides that “no person may be convicted both pursuant to this section and of the theft of the same property.” (Pen. Code, § 496, subd. (a).) Our Supreme Court has stated: “[J]uries should be instructed to reach a verdict on the theft charge when the defendant is also charged with receiving the stolen property. A guilty verdict on the theft charge makes it unnecessary to consider the receiving charge. This practice . . . promotes efficiency in the jury’s deliberations, and will ensure that the statutory ban against dual convictions is applied.” (People v. Ceja…