P. v. Jaime
Appellant appeals the judgment sending him to prison for 16 years after a jury convicted him of robbery. Subsequent to the trial, the court found he had three prior "strike"? convictions, three prior serious felony convictions, and two prior prison terms. Appellant contends on appeal that the trial court failed to instruct sua sponte as to the lesser included offense of attempted robbery and as to the definition of the force that could be used to prevent a thief from escaping. Appellant also finds error in the court's failure to instruct sua sponte on the unanimity instruction. Finally, appellant argues the evidence was insufficient to sustain the findings by the court that his prior burglary convictions were serious felonies and "strikes."? Court affirms.
Comments on P. v. Jaime