People v. Neith CA5

INTRODUCTION

Defendant Alfred Jacob Neith stands convicted by jury of one count of assault with a firearm pursuant to Penal Code section 245, subdivision (a)(2). 1, 2 The jury also found true a great bodily injury (GBI) enhancement under section 12022.7, subdivision (a), and a firearm enhancement under section 12022.5, subdivision (a). Defendant was sentenced to an aggregate determinate term of nine years. 3 (§§ 245, subd. (a)(2), 12022.5, subd. (a), 12022.7, subd. (a).) The court also imposed a $300 restitution fine, and court assessments in the amount of $70. Defendant appeals the conviction on grounds the People failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did not act in self-defense or in defense of others in shooting the victim, the trial court erroneously and prejudicially excluded portions of the victim’s interview with police, and the trial court erred by failing to consider defendant’s inability to pay the fines and fees assessed at sentencing. For the reasons discussed below, we conclude there was substantial evidence to support the verdict, any error by the trial court in excluding the victim’s police interview was not prejudicial, and the argument under People v.…