legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Oeur
After a jury trial, defendant was found guilty of second degree robbery in violation of Penal Code section 211 with an enhancement under Penal Code sections 12022.53, subdivision (b), and 1192.7 subdivision (c)(8), for using a firearm in the commission of the robbery. Defendant was sentenced to 12 years in state prison.
On appeal, defendant contends his conviction for using a firearm during a robbery must be reversed because his Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated when he was denied the opportunity to present his defense that the gun used in the robbery was a BB gun. Defendant contends that the cumulative effect of the following errors led to a violation of his Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights: (1) he was precluded from presenting expert testimony and photographs; (2) his examination of an expert witness was improperly limited; and (3) the trial court made an improper comment regarding the victims testimony. Defendant also contends that any errors should be reviewed under the standard set forth in Chapman v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 18, 24 [87 S.Ct. 824, 17 L.Ed.2d 705]. Court have found no errors in the actions of the trial court. Therefore, Court find no violation of defendants Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The judgment is affirmed.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale