P. v. McVey
Filed 7/26/06 P. v. McVey CA3
Appendix not available electrnoically
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
(Amador)
----
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DENNY McVEY, Defendant and Appellant. | C049835
(Super. Ct. No. 04CR5155)
|
Defendant Denny Lee McVey was sentenced to six years in prison after a jury found him guilty of possessing marijuana in prison. At trial, counsel admitted to the court he had failed to interview two witnesses whose testimony would call into question whether defendant had knowledge of the narcotic nature of the substance he possessed. Finding counsel's performance prejudicially deficient, we will reverse the judgment.[1] For the trial court's guidance on retrial, we will also address defendant's three other contentions.[2]
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On July 5, 2003, Correctional Officer Kevin Rutherford was on yard duty at Mule Creek State Prison. At approximately 8:00 p.m., Rutherford saw defendant and two other inmates walking by the soccer net. When Rutherford took a couple of steps in their direction, defendant â€
