P. v. Mason
Appellant Micah Jerrod Mason challenges his carjacking and robbery convictions on the grounds they are not supported by the evidence, defense counsel labored under a conflict of interest and rendered ineffective assistance, the prosecutions failure to disclose certain photographs violated due process, an officers conduct in citing a potential witness with obstructing justice violated appellants right to compulsory process, and the court improperly punished him for robbing and carjacking the same victim. Appellant also requests that this court review the record of in camera proceedings regarding his motion for discovery of police officer personnel records and complaints. Court conclude ample evidence supports appellants convictions. Appellant did not establish that his attorney had an actual or a potential conflict of interest. The prosecutions failure to disclose photographs purportedly taken by the Riverside Police Department did not violate due process because the photographs were not material. Appellants right to compulsory process was not violated by charging a man who lied to officers on the scene with obstructing justice. Penal Code section 654 requires that appellants sentence for robbery be stayed. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in ruling upon appellants discovery motion.
Comments on P. v. Mason