P. v. Crawford
Defendant Cisco Ray Crawford was convicted by jury trial of robbery. On appeal, he contends (1) the trial court erred by failing to instruct sua sponte on the lesser included offense of theft, (2) the instruction on a witnesss inconsistent statements (CALCRIM No. 318) created an improper presumption and (3) the trial court abused its discretion by permitting the prosecutor to amend the information with a strike allegation. Court affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Crawford