Flynn

People v. Flynn

Good Law
2000 Cal. App. LEXIS 33·2000 Daily Journal DAR 777·77 Cal. App. 4th 766·91 Cal. Rptr. 2d 902·2000 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 498
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 19, 2000No. B123817California2,095 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Neill, J.

*769 Opinion

I. Introduction

Defendant, Christopher Flynn, was sentenced to state prison following his conviction of robbery. He now argues insufficiency of evidence, improper exclusion of the victim’s prior misdemeanor conduct, and erroneous denial of a motion for new trial. The People oppose these contentions and note the absence of a mandatory parole revocation fine. We modify the judgment and affirm. In the published portion of our opinion, we uphold a robbery conviction on the theory that the perpetrator used fear to accomplish retention of the property after it was taken.

II. Procedural History

A jury trial on charges of robbery (Pen. Code, § 211) and battery on a police officer (Pen. Code, § 243, subd. (b)) resulted in conviction of the robbery. The jury hung on the other charge, which was eventually dismissed. The People charged a number of prior felony convictions, but proceeded only on two: (1) assault with a firearm (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(2)) as a “strike,” serious felony, and prior prison term; and (2) possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a)) as a prior prison term. The trial court found both priors true, and used them to…

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.