People v. Perlman CA1/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 13, 2021A157409California5,055 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND

The prosecution charged Perlman with second degree robbery (§ 211) and commercial burglary (§§ 459, 460, subd. (b)) and alleged Perlman used a firearm in the commission of the robbery (§§ 12022, 12022.5, 12022.53). Perlman’s first trial ended in a mistrial after the jury was unable to reach a verdict. A. In 2015, Jose M., M.M., and Bryce L. worked at a pharmacy in a Corte Madera shopping center. The pharmacy stored controlled substances—

Although the verdict form for the allegation under section 12022, subdivision (b)(1) expressly referred to the deadly weapon as a “firearm,” defense counsel referred to the weapon as a BB gun or a “replica” firearm. We therefore refer to the weapon used in the robbery as a weapon. Perlman does not challenge the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the deadly weapon enhancement. (Upshaw v. Superior Court (2018) 22 Cal.App.5th 489, 504, fn. 7 [appellate court need not consider issues unsupported by cognizable legal argument or citation to authority].)

2 including Oxycodone and Percocet—in a locked cabinet. Only Bryce, the pharmacist, had a key to the cabinet. At 1:00 p.m. on an April 2015 afternoon, a man carrying what appeared to be…

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.