People v. Lazo CA2/1

facts and was therefore inadmissible; and (2) the evidence was insufficient to establish that the crimes were committed for the benefit of or in association with a criminal street gang. In light of our Supreme Court’s recent decision in People v. Valencia (2021) 11 Cal.5th 818, 826 (Valencia), we agree with the first contention, but hold that the error was harmless with respect to all gang enhancements except the enhancement associated with the carjacking count. We reject the second contention. Lazo further argues that the prosecutor committed prejudicial misconduct and deprived him of a fair trial because exhibits in evidence improperly included information about a prior conviction and Lazo’s parole status, and the prosecutor made improper statements during his argument to the jury. He also argues that the prosecutor committed misconduct in various ways during a re-argument of the murder charge to the jury. In addition to finding that these contentions have been forfeited by failing to raise them below, we reject them on the merits, as well as the related ineffective assistance of counsel contentions.

FACTUAL SUMMARY

The events described below took place on April 29,…