P. v. Rojas
Defendant was convicted of attempted murder; the jury found he acted willfully, deliberately, and with premeditation. On appeal, defendant argues the trial court erred by instructing the jury that flight after the commission of a crime may show a consciousness of guilt. Defendant contends that such an instruction was prejudicial since the only issue at trial was his level of culpability, not his identity. That argument has been rejected by the California Supreme Court on a number of occasions.
Defendant also argues he received ineffective assistance of counsel, because his trial counsel did not request an instruction that provocation may reduce an attempted murder from first degree to second degree. Court conclude defendants trial counsel was not ineffective, because there was no evidence of provocation whether objective or subjective to justify the giving of such an instruction. Finally, defendant argues the trial court erred by refusing to give him any conduct credits. The Attorney General concedes, and we agree, that defendant was entitled to conduct credits totaling 15 percent of his presentence custody credits. Court affirm the judgment, and direct the trial court to correct the abstract of judgment to reflect defendants entitlement to conduct credits.
Comments on P. v. Rojas