legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Frazier

P. v. Frazier
03:04:2007

P


P. v. Frazier


Filed 1/23/07  P. v. Frazier CA5


NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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  This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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


FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT







THE PEOPLE,


Plaintiff and Respondent,


                        v.


ERIC SHANNON FRAZIER,


Defendant and Appellant.



F048419


(Super. Ct. No. 135255)


OPINION


THE COURT*


            APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tulare County.  Melinda M. Reed, Judge.


            John R. Hargreaves, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.


            Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Mary Jo Graves, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Stan Cross, Assistant Attorney General, and John G. McLean, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.


-ooOoo-


Returning home one afternoon, a couple found their home â€





Description Returning home one afternoon, a couple found their home "a complete disaster" with drawers pulled open and everything "dumped on the floor" and saw Eric Shannon Frazier and someone else fleeing through a window. A jury found Frazier guilty as charged of first degree residential burglary (SS 459, 460, subd. (a)), grand theft of personal property (S 487, subd. (a)), grand theft of a firearm (S 487, subd. (d)(2)), felon in possession of a firearm (S 12021, subd. (a)(1)), and felon in possession of ammunition (S 12316, subd. (b)(1)). The court imposed an aggregate 4 year sentence (the 4 year middle term on the first degree residential burglary and the 2 year middle terms stayed on each of the other crimes).
On appeal, Frazier raises two challenges to the judgment of conviction of grand theft of personal property (insufficiency of the evidence and ineffective assistance of counsel) and one challenge to the judgment of conviction of first degree residential burglary (worktime credit error). Court affirm the judgment.

Rating
0/5 based on 0 votes.

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2024 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2024 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale