People v. Rodriguez CA5

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 5, 2022F080727California24,391 words

Opinion

Opinion

INTRODUCTION

At his first trial and on February 26, 2018, a jury acquitted defendant Jorge M. Rodriguez of first degree murder for his role in the deaths of Calvin Lamar Reese and Jose Nunez Duenas but failed to reach a verdict as to second degree murder charges. A separate jury convicted codefendant Gustavo Adolfo Duenas1 of second degree murder as to both victims. On retrial, the jury convicted defendant of two counts of second degree murder, and on December 9, 2019, the trial court sentenced defendant to a term of 30 years to life in prison. Defendant contends on appeal that (1) the trial court erred in failing to sua sponte instruct the jury as to the natural and probable consequences doctrine, (2) the trial court’s instructions erroneously permitted the jury to find defendant aided and abetted murder based upon implied malice and without the specific intent to kill, and (3) the jury instructions permitted the jury to convict based upon imputed malice. In supplemental briefing, defendant contends that, although the jury was not instructed on the now defunct natural and probable consequences doctrine of imputed malice, he is entitled to a new trial because the instructions as…

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.