P. v. Broussard
Filed 6/20/06 P. v. Broussard CA2/4
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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 FOUR
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CEDRICK D. BROUSSARD, Defendant and Appellant. | B184135 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA239920) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Curtis B. Rappe, Judge. Affirmed.
Landra E. Rosenthal, 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, Joseph P. Lee and Carl N. Henry, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Cedrick D. Broussard (appellant) appeals from the judgment entered following a jury trial in which he was convicted of one count of second degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a)) with findings that the offense was committed for the benefit of a street gang, and that a principal personally used a firearm within the meaning of Penal Code section 12022.53, subdivisions (d) and (e)(1).[1] He was sentenced to 40 years to life and ordered to pay a restitution fine in the amount of $10,000 pursuant to section 1202.4, subdivision (b). The court imposed and stayed a $10,000 parole revocation fine. It also ordered appellant to pay $7,500 to the state victim's restitution fund. Appellant contends on appeal that there was insufficient evidence of aider and abettor liability, that the court erred in admitting testimony from a witness about appellant's veracity, that there was insufficient evidence to support the finding on the gang enhancement, and that he should only be held jointly liable for the restitution award.
FACTUAL & PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Appellant was convicted of shooting Tyzell Carter. Chris Menefee was also charged with the death of Carter in the same information. He was tried separately from appellant, convicted, and appealed. His conviction was affirmed in an opinion filed November 8, 2005, case No. B177829.
At appellant's trial, the principal prosecution witness was Taniesha Prescott (Prescott). She knew both appellant, Menefee, and Carter, and knew that they were all members of the Playboy Gangster Crips. Appellant and Menefee got along, but appellant and Carter did not.
In the evening of April 29, 2002, appellant and Menefee arrived at Prescott's house carrying weapons, as they often did. Appellant was carrying a revolver which Prescott said was broken. He was wearing a bloody shirt and his hand was swollen. He threw his shirt in the trash and he and Menefee wrapped their guns in some old towels which Prescott provided. Menefee and appellant spent the night at Prescott's house. Menefee told Prescott that he was involved in the shooting of Carter. Prescott noticed that appellant was crying during the night. The next day, appellant and Menefee were laughing and talking about Carter's death. Menefee said he shot Carter in the face and said to appellant, â€
