P. v. West

Filed 1/10/07  P. v. West 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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  This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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)

----

        Defendant Darryl Franklin West was convicted after a jury trial of robbery (Pen. Code, § 211) and resisting arrest (Pen. Code, § 148).  The jury further found that defendant had personally used a firearm in the commission of the robbery.   (Pen. Code, § 12022.53, subd. (b).)  Sentenced to 13 years in state prison, defendant appeals.  Defendant contends the prosecutor engaged in misconduct during his examination of a witness or, alternatively, that reversal is required because the witness's testimony should have been excluded as irrelevant and prejudicial.  We affirm.

BACKGROUND

        On the morning of December 26, 2003, defendant walked into a Check-Into-Cash store in Manteca.  He approached the counter where manager Norma Hernandez was seated, withdrew a loaded .380 automatic handgun from underneath his jacket, pointed it at Hernandez, and demanded money.  Hernandez complied and gave defendant $594 in currency.  Defendant took the money and walked away.  A video recording of the robbery and still photographs made from the tape were later shown to the jury at trial. 

        Hernandez immediately called the police and provided a physical description of the robber.  The description was relayed to other police officers in the area. 

        In the meantime, defendant had walked into a liquor store where he was known to the cashier, and purchased $42.77 worth of products.  A video recording of that transaction was later shown to the jury. 

        A few minutes later, officers saw defendant walking down a street approximately five blocks from Check-Into-Cash.  Defendant matched the description of the robber and kept looking back over his shoulder as he walked.  Defendant was carrying his bag of groceries.  When the officers attempted to approach defendant to question him, defendant ran. 

        Officer David Brown chased defendant.  Twice during the chase, defendant stopped, reached down the front of his pants, and started to turn toward the officer.  At one point during the pursuit, defendant fell to the ground and lost the loaded .380 automatic handgun he had been carrying.  When Officer Brown eventually tackled defendant, defendant attempted to take Brown's gun from its holster. 

        When defendant was taken into custody, he had $551.13 in his pocket.  Some of the bills were sequentially numbered.  The $551.13 in defendant's pocket and the $42.77 in groceries add up precisely to the $594 stolen during the robbery.  Hernandez identified defendant as the robber at an in-field show-up and again at trial. 

        Defendant denied committing the robbery.  He and some of his family testified at trial that his wife had recently received a substantial inheritance.  Therefore, defendant argued, he had no motive to commit the robbery.  Defendant claimed he ran from the officers because he did not have a permit to carry the handgun. 

DISCUSSION

I

The Testimony of Defendant's Wife

        The prosecutor called defendant's wife, Catrina Squires, and examined her regarding statements she had made to officers after defendant's arrest that she had overspent for Christmas, that she had been complaining to defendant about not having enough money, that defendant had been acting withdrawn and â€