P. v. Villanueva
Filed 4/5/06 P. v. Villanueva CA2/2
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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 TWO
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JOSE VILLANUEVA, Defendant and Appellant. | B181118 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA258932) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Ruffo Espinosa, Jr., Judge. Affirmed.
Tara K. Allen, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Assistant Attorney General, Linda C. Johnson and Michael A. Katz, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
_________________
Jose Villanueva appeals from the judgment entered upon his conviction by jury of attempted willful, deliberate and premeditated murder in which he personally used and discharged a firearm, causing great bodily injury, with the finding that the crime was committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang. (Pen. Code, §§ 664/187, subd. (a), 12022.53, subds. (b), (c), (d), (e), 186.22, subd. (b)(1).) He was sentenced to life in prison with a 15-year minimum parole period and to a 25-year-to-life firearm use enhancement.
Appellant contends that (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction of attempted murder and to support the finding of premeditation and deliberation; (2) the evidence was insufficient to support the finding on the criminal street gang allegation; (3) the trial court erred in failing to bifurcate the criminal street gang allegation; (4) his right to a fair and impartial jury was violated when the trial court failed to dismiss a juror for misconduct after the juror talked to multiple people about the case during trial; (5) the sentence of 40 years to life constitutes cruel and unusual punishment under the federal and state Constitutions; and (6) the cumulative effect of the errors mandates reversal.
We affirm.
FACTS
We view the evidence in accordance with the usual rules of appellate review. (People v. Snow (2003) 30 Cal.4th 43, 66.) At approximately 8:00 p.m. on January 8, 2004, Jose R., Jr. (Jose), the 15-year-old shooting victim, was walking down Union Street in Los Angeles when three Hispanic men approached. Standing at a distance of three feet, one of the men asked him where he was from. Jose understood the question to refer to whether he was in a gang or â€
