P. v. Ceballos
A jury convicted Julio Ceballos of three misdemeanor counts of gang-related brandishing of a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, 186.22, subd. (d); 417, subd. (a)(2)(A)), and felony counts for street terrorism ( 186.22, subd. (a)), gang-related possession of a concealed firearm in a vehicle ( 12025, subd. (a)(3), (b)(3)), and unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon ( 12021, subd. (a)(1)). The jury found defendant committed the firearm possession offenses for the benefit of a criminal street gang. ( 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(A).) Defendant contends his street terrorism conviction must be reversed because that offense occurs only where the offender aids and abets some other felony distinct from any he commits himself. In proscribing street terrorism, however, the Legislature did not intend to punish only persons who demonstrate their active participation in a criminal street gang by aiding and abetting felony offenses, while exempting from punishment their equally or more culpable gang compatriots who directly perpetrate the offense. (People v. Salcido (2007) 149 Cal.App.4th 356, 367-370 (Salcido); People v. Ngoun (2001) 88 Cal.App.4th 432, 435 (Ngoun).)
Defendant further contends the trial court erred by: (1) permitting the prosecutions gang expert to offer an opinion on defendants purported subjective knowledge of his gangs criminal activities, and (2) counting two of his prior convictions as separate strikes though they arose from the same act. As Court explain below, defendants sentencing contention has no merit. Court affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Ceballos