People v. Ramirez CA2/3

INTRODUCTION

Appellants Ramirez, Guerrero and Jimenez challenge a number of claimed errors in their criminal trial and sentencing. As discussed below, there is sufficient evidence to support the jury’s finding on the gang enhancement and there was no instructional error as to that allegation. In addition, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying an untimely request to substitute counsel for appellant Jimenez. The court did not abuse its discretion in deciding not to bifurcate the gang enhancement allegations. Allowing the prosecutor to restate the hypothetical question posed to the gang expert in order to eliminate any reference to the actual victims or the appellants was not unduly prejudicial. And, the trial court’s denial of appellant Jimenez’s motion for a new trial was not erroneous. The trial court did, however, incorrectly sentence appellant Ramirez on count 4, and the abstract of judgment for appellant Guerrero does not reflect his actual sentence. Accordingly, the judgment of conviction against all three appellants is affirmed, but Ramirez’s sentence is remanded to strike the 10 year sentence imposed on the gun enhancement on count 4 and the clerk of the…