P. v. Robinson
Filed 5/15/06 P. v. Robinson CA2/5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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 FIVE
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. EARNIE E. ROBINSON, Defendant and Appellant. | B184715 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA269945) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court for the County of Los Angeles, Samuel Mayerson, Judge. Affirmed.
Stephen Temko, 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, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Steven D. Matthews, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, David F. Glassman, Deputy Attorney General.
____________
Defendant and appellant Earnie E. Robinson appeals his conviction by a jury of rape (Penal Code,[1] § 261, subd. (a)(2) and assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)). He contends the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions because the victim later recanted her statements to the police that defendant had raped and assaulted her, thereby retroactively consenting to sexual intercourse with defendant; that the trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury that an essential element of rape consists of the outrage and feelings of the victim; and that defendant was denied effective assistance of counsel because trial counsel failed to request a jury instruction concerning â€
