P. v. Delacruz
Filed 7/26/06 P. v. Delacruz CA3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
(San Joaquin)
----
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JOSE ROBERT DELACRUZ, Defendant and Appellant. | C050385
(Super. Ct. No. MF028234A)
|
Manteca police arrested defendant Jose Robert Delacruz on October 26, 2004, on suspicion of carjacking. The San Joaquin County District Attorney charged him with carjacking (Pen. Code, § 215, subd. (a) - count 1),[1] robbery (§ 211 - count 2), possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a) - count 3), active participation in a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (a) - count 4) and possession of a loaded firearm by an active participant in a criminal street gang (§ 12031, subd. (a)(2)(C) - count 5). As to count 2, the information also alleged defendant personally used a firearm in the commission of the offense. (§ 12022.53, subd. (b).)
During trial, the court granted the prosecutor's motion to dismiss the drug possession charge in count 3. Thereafter, the jury found defendant guilty of carjacking and robbery in counts 1 and 2, and found true the personal firearm use allegation. It found defendant not guilty of counts 4 and 5. The court sentenced defendant to 15 years in prison.
On appeal, defendant argues he was denied a fair trial because the court rejected his request to sever trial of the gang charge. Defendant also maintains the error was compounded by admission of drug possession allegations the prosecutor knew he could not prove. We shall affirm the judgment.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Seth Hardin and his cousin Richard Cruz went to the â€
