legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Castaneda
On July 21, 2006, Horatio, Vidal and Abraham Guzman were driving home from work. While their vehicle was stopped at a red light, a white Ford Explorer pulled up next to it. The Explorer contained two people who were subsequently identified as appellant Jose Gregorio Castaneda and codefendant Guadalupe Sanchez, Jr. One of the Explorers occupants pointed a shotgun out of a window and fired a blast into the Guzmans vehicle, injuring Horatio and Vidal. Appellant argues that the trial court infringed his federal constitutional compulsory process right by excluding Sanchez as a defense witness. Also, he argues that the trial court abused its discretion and constitutionally erred by permitting a gang expert to testify about hearsay statements Sanchez made to the expert as one of the bases for the experts opinion that the drive-by shooting was gang-related. Furthermore, appellant argues that the section 12022.53, subdivision (d) enhancement attached to count 3 is not supported by substantial evidence and that the section 12022.7, subdivision (a) enhancements attached to counts 1 and 2 should have been stricken. None of appellants arguments are convincing. Respondent correctly points out two clerical errors in the abstract of judgment. Court affirm and order preparation of a corrected abstract of judgment.

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
    © 2024 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2024 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale