P. v. Carrothers and Broadway

Filed 2/28/06 P. v. Carrothers and Broadway CA3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Sacramento)

Defendant Jeffery Don Broadway induced a 14-year-old girl to work as a prostitute and had her engage in sexual activity with himself and codefendant LaShanna Marie Carrothers. After he invited the victim's 11-year-old sister to work for him, both defendants were arrested.

A jury convicted Broadway of several sexual offenses. (Pen. Code, §§ 261.5, subd. (d) (two counts), 266j, 288a, subd. (b)(2) (four counts)), and the trial court found he had a prior strike (second degree robbery). During jury selection, Carrothers pleaded no contest to unlawful sexual intercourse, oral copulation with a child under 16, contributing to the delinquency of a minor and prostitution. (Id., §§ 261.5, subd. (d), 272, subd. (a)(1), 288a, subd. (b)(2), 647, subd. (b).) The trial court granted Carrothers probation and sent Broadway to prison for 16 years. We consolidated their timely appeals. We shall affirm.

FACTS

The issues raised do not require a detailed recitation of the facts. For background it is enough to say that defendant befriended L., a 14-year-old girl who was unhappy with her current pimp; defendant had sex with her that night and encouraged her to have sex with Carrothers; he also induced her to perform sex acts with men for money, of which L. gave half to him. L. called her 11-year-old sister N. and mentioned she was going to work as a prostitute in Reno; N. pretended to be interested in this occupation and spoke to defendant. N. reported what was happening to her aunt and defendant was arrested. He made incriminating statements in a videotaped interrogation, and admitted knowing L. was 14 or 15 and that he had had sex with L. and with L. and Carrothers at the same time.

DISCUSSION

I. Appeal of Broadway

Broadway contends his trial counsel was incompetent because Broadway was not advised that the trial court judge was married to a police officer and counsel did not properly explore possible jury misconduct pertaining to mid-trial publicity; he also asserts some testimony was inadmissible. We find no error.

A. Disqualification of Trial Judge

The jury reached its verdicts on September 1, 2004. On September 20, 2004, the court received a handwritten â€