People v. Kamfolt CA6

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 30, 2016H041642California3,798 words

Opinion

Opinion

Manoukian, J.

I. INTRODUCTION

A jury convicted defendant Ryan Nathaniel Kamfolt of first degree burglary (Pen. Code, §§ 459/460, subd. (a))1 and found true an allegation that a person was present during the burglary (§ 667.5, subd. (c)(21)). The trial court found true allegations that defendant had a prior conviction that qualified as a strike (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12) and a prior serious felony conviction (§ 667, subd. (a)), and an allegation that defendant had served a prior prison term (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). Defendant was sentenced to a 13-year prison term. On appeal, defendant contends the trial court abused its discretion by admitting evidence of two prior offenses: burglary with intent to commit rape and theft

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated. (§§ 459/460, subd. (a)) and prowling (§ 647, subd. (h)). For reasons that we will explain, we will affirm the judgment. Defendant has also filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus, which this court ordered considered with the appeal. We have disposed of the habeas petition by separate order filed this day. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.387(b)(2)(B).)

II. BACKGROUND

A. …

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.