People v. Sherow CA4/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 13, 2016D068668California2,342 words

Opinion

Opinion

Huffman, J.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

Both parties have relied on the statement of facts from a prior appeal on the merits

in this case (People v. Sherow (Feb. 11, 2013, D062184) [nonpub. opn.]). We have taken

judicial notice of the records in that case. The summary relied on by the parties is as

follows:

Riverside Police Detective Charles Payne testified that in August 2007, he

conducted surveillance on Timothy Sherow Sr., Dominique Sherow's father.2 Timothy

left a department store in Orange County, and drove to department stores in the city of

Corona. Simultaneously, police surveilled Dominique in the city of Riverside, and

observed him answer his cell phone and drive quickly to AAA Jewelry & Loan pawn

shop, where Timothy and Dominique met, talked briefly, and Timothy handed

Dominique a large box full of DVD boxed sets. Dominique took the DVDs inside the

pawn shop, while Timothy waited in the parking lot. After a while, both met again in the

parking lot, spoke briefly, and Dominique gave Timothy money, which they divided

before departing in their respective vehicles. A ticket from the pawn shop that day

identified Dominique as the seller of 259 videos for $518. Dominique…

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.