Moomey

People v. Moomey

Good Law
123 Cal. Rptr. 3d 749·194 Cal. App. 4th 850·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 487
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 26, 2011No. E049827California3,349 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

King, J.

I. INTRODUCTION

This case arises from the burglary and theft of approximately $80 in groceries and cookware from a Stater Bros, grocery store. Defendant’s girlfriend, Janna Lorette, was the alleged principal in the burglary. Defendant was charged with being an accessory after the fact pursuant to Penal Code section 32. 1 He was convicted of the charge by a jury and sentenced to two years in prison.

On appeal, defendant contends the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction. First, he contends there was no substantial evidence he knew that *853 Lorette intended to steal when she entered the store. Second, he argues he cannot be convicted of being an accessory to a felony when there was no evidence that the underlying burglary was a felony burglary. Defendant further contends the jury instructions erroneously failed to clarify that defendant could not be convicted for merely helping the perpetrator after she committed theft; the court prejudicially erred in giving a flight instruction; and the cumulative effect of errors requires reversal. We reject these arguments and affirm the judgment. Finally, defendant contends, and the People agree, that the court erred…

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.