People v. Jones CA5

DISCUSSION

Appellant raises three issues on appeal. First, appellant claims his due process rights were violated when the trial court instructed the jury with CALCRIM No. 315. Second, appellant identifies a second due process claim along with a violation of his right to a jury trial, this time based on juror misconduct. Third, appellant contends recent modifications to the law require his two prior prison term enhancements be stricken. The People concede this final point. We consider each argument in turn. CALCRIM No. 315 Does Not Violate the Due Process Clause Appellant argues that his due process rights were violated when the trial court utilized CALCRIM No. 315 without excising the factor discussing a witness’s certainty when making an identification. Recognizing that no objection was raised at trial, appellant alternatively argues ineffective assistance of counsel with respect to this issue.

This was appellant’s third trial on charges arising from this incident. Additional information regarding the procedural history of this case can be found in our prior nonpublished opinion. (People v. Jones (Apr. 18, 2019, F074330).)

3. Factual and Procedural Background CALCRIM…