P. v. Miranda
Filed 2/16/07 P. v. Miranda CA2/4
NOTTO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
CaliforniaRules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing orrelying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, exceptas specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified forpublication 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.
ALFONSO MIRANDA,
Defendant and Appellant.
| B188361
(Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. VA086510) |
APPEALfrom a judgment of the Superior Court ofLos Angeles County, John A. Torribio, Judge. Affirmed as modified.
DavidL. Polsky, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant andAppellant.
BillLockyer, Attorney General, Mary JoGraves, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, AssistantAttorney General, Steven D. Matthews and Catherine Okawa Kohm, Deputy AttorneysGeneral, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
INTRODUCTION
A jury convicted defendant Alfonso Miranda of multiplecrimes, including the willful, deliberate, and premeditated attempted murder ofhis wife.
Onthis appeal, defendant primarily contends that his attempted murder convictionmust be reversed because trial counsel was ineffective for failing to requestCALJIC No. 8.73. The instruction explains that provocation insufficient toreduce murder to manslaughter may still negate the allegation that theattempted murder was deliberate and premeditated. We reject the contention,finding there is a reasonable basis for not requesting the instruction. Although defendant testified at trial, he claimed that he had â€