P. v. Romero CA4/3
Defendant Josue Alejandro Romero appeals from the judgment entered after a jury found him guilty of second degree robbery. He contends (1) the trial court improperly instructed the jury on an uncharged conspiracy theory of liability, (2) insufficient evidence supported his conviction, (3) the trial court improperly responded to the jury’s question regarding the definition of “force” in the robbery instruction, and (4) he suffered prejudice from cumulative error.
Comments on P. v. Romero CA4/3