P. v. Orcutt
Filed 5/3/06 P. v. Orcutt CA2/8
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION EIGHT
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MICHAEL ORCUTT et al., Defendants and Appellants. | B179233 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. SA052969) |
APPEALS from judgments of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County.
Steven R. Van Sicklen, Judge. Affirmed.
William L. Heyman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant Michael J. Orcutt.
Barbara A. Smith, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant Ryan Whitman.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Robert F. Katz, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, Michael R. Johnsen and Roy C. Preminger, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Michael Orcutt and Ryan Whitman appeal from their convictions of assault, robbery, and attempted robbery. Both challenge the sufficiency of the evidence, the admission of photographs of one victim and blood at the scene of the assault, and the trial court's imposition of the aggravated term for robbery. We reject appellants' narrow definition of the robbery and attempted robbery, find no error, and affirm the judgments.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Orcutt and Whitman pled not guilty to charges of second degree robbery, attempted second degree robbery, and assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury. They were tried by jury. At trial, identity was not an issue. When asked if â€
