PEOPLE v. COX
Filed 8/10/10
CERTIFIED
FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION*
IN
THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND
APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION
FIVE
THE
PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
JAMIE
D. COX et al.,
Defendants and Appellants.
B207285
(Los Angeles County
Super. Ct. No. TA088018)
STORY CONTINUE FROM
PART II….
B. Accomplice Instructions
1. Factual and procedural background
Defendants argue that the trial
court improperly failed to instruct the jury sua sponte with CALCRIM No. 334[1] regarding accomplice testimony. During the discussions between the trial
court and counsel regarding jury instructions, the prosecutor indicated that
CALCRIM No. 334 had been withdrawn as inapplicable. Ms. Trotter, counsel for Mr. Jackson,
stated she wanted this instruction to be given.
The trial court responded, â€
| Description | Defendants, Freddie Howard Jones, Shawney Jackson, and Jamie Cox, appeal from their convictions for murder (Pen. Code,[1] § 187, subd. (a)) and the jurors' findings that a principal personally discharged a firearm causing great bodily injury and death (§§ 12022.53, subds. (b), (c), (d)) and the murder was committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang. (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(C).) Ms. Cox and Mr. Jackson were convicted of first degree murder. Mr. Jones was convicted of second degree murder. We affirm the judgments with modifications. In the published portion of this opinion, we discuss defendants' arguments that the trial court failed to discharge the jury panel after the prosecutor exercised nine peremptory challenges against African-American jurors. Court conclude the trial court complied with its constitutional obligation to engage in a sincere and reasoned effort to evaluate the nondiscriminatory justifications provided by the deputy district attorney. Thus, no constitutional error occurred during the jury selection process. |
| Rating |
