Jones

People v. Jones

Good Law
1998 Cal. App. LEXIS 910·67 Cal. App. 4th 724·79 Cal. Rptr. 2d 258·98 Daily Journal DAR 11290·98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8139
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 30, 1998No. B112968California1,774 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Epstein, J.

*726 Opinion

Marlin Jones challenges his conviction under Penal Code section 136.1 for dissuading a witness from testifying. 1 In the published part of this opinion, we consider appellant’s argument that the jury was improperly instructed that this offense is a general intent crime, and the “same occasion” rule for consecutive sentencing under the “Three Strikes” law. We find no prejudicial error on the former, and no error on the latter. We find no error with respect to the other sentencing issues raised by appellant. We affirm the judgment.

Factual and Procedural Summary

On December 7, 1995, appellant entered Randy Megrdle’s residence. Appellant took a checkbook, a .357-caliber revolver, a beeper, two watches, a wallet and a gold chain from the residence. One of the checks taken from Megrdle’s apartment was used to purchase a Sega Saturn and other toys at Toys-R-Us. Although Megrdle did not sign the check, it bore his name. Tyla Brown, a cashier at Toys-R-Us, approved the check.

The revolver was returned to Megrdle by his brother Phillip Megrdle who received it from Darrell Conedy. Conedy was a friend of Randy and Phillip Megrdle, and knew appellant.

According to Conedy,…

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.