P. v. Carrillo
Defendant appeals from his conviction of second degree burglary of a motor vehicle (Pen. Code[1], 459) and receiving stolen property ( 496, subd. (a)), with seven prior felony convictions ( 667, subds. (b) (i)). He asserts the prosecutor engaged in misconduct by failing to disclose or deliver evidence favorable to defendant and arguing that defendants version of events was a big lie based on the absence of that evidence. Additionally, he asserts the court erred in instructing the jury to view defendants oral statements with caution, when those statements were exculpatory, failed to determine whether defendant was eligible for probation and whether probation should be granted, and abused its discretion in refusing to strike all, or all but one, of his prior strikes. Court affirm.
Comments on P. v. Carrillo