P. v. LaFavor
Defendant appeals from a conviction of attempting to deter an executive officer from his or her duty. (Pen. Code, 69.) LaFavor argues that the trial court erred in not providing a unanimity instruction. He contends that the instruction was required because his resistance involved two distinct incidents of conduct. As a result, the jury could have reached different judgments as to which act formed the basis for their verdict. LaFavor argues that the omission of this instruction deprived him of his constitutional rights to due process and a unanimous jury verdict. He additionally argues that the trial court violated his Sixth Amendment right when it imposed the upper term based on facts not decided by a jury. Court conclude that the unanimity instruction was not required, but, that even if it were, the omission resulted in harmless error. Court also conclude any error under the Sixth Amendment harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Court affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. LaFavor