P. v. Martinez
Defendants robbed a Rite Aid Store. Juries convicted them of multiple counts of robbery ( Pen. Code, 211; unspecified section references that follow are to the Penal Code), assault with a deadly weapon ( 245, subd. (a)(2)), and false imprisonment ( 236), and found true charged firearm enhancements. ( 12022, subd. (a)(1), 12022.5, subd. (a); 12022.53, subd. (b).) The trial court sentenced defendant Martinez to an aggregate prison term of 20 years, and defendant Hernandez to an aggregate term of 24 years 4 months.
On appeal, defendant asserts that (1) insufficient evidence supports the jurys findings under sections 12022.5 and 12022.53 that he personally used a firearm in the commission of the offenses, (2) the court erred in permitting the prosecutor to amend the information at the close of trial to add allegations under section 12022, subdivision (a)(1), and (3) the court miscalculated the crime prevention fine.
Defendant joins in his co defendants claims and also asserts that (1) the court erred in denying his Batson-Wheeler motion (Batson v. Kentucky (1986) 476 U.S. 79 [90 L.Ed.2d 69] (Batson); People v. Wheeler (1978) 22 Cal.3d 258 (Wheeler)), (2) the court erred in ordering restitution fines, and (3) the abstract of judgment does not reflect the restitution/parole revocation fines actually ordered by the court. Defendant Martinez joins in these claims.
Court find merit only in defendant Martinezs claim relating to the crime prevention fine, and in defendant Hernandezs claim alleging error in the abstract of judgment. Court modify the judgment accordingly and, in all other respects, affirm.
Comments on P. v. Martinez