P. v. Perez CA4/3
Defendant Ricardo Perez appeals from the judgment entered after a jury found him guilty of one count of carjacking and three counts of second degree robbery. The jury also found true the sentencing enhancement allegation that defendant personally used a firearm in the commission of the carjacking offense and in two of the second degree robbery offenses. Defendant admitted prior conviction and prior prison term enhancement allegations.
We affirm. For the reasons we explain, defendant’s argument that insufficient evidence supported his conviction as an aider and abettor in the second degree robbery of Juana Perez (charged as count 4 in the amended information) is without merit. The trial court did not err by refusing defendant’s request that the jury be given a pinpoint instruction stating that a pellet gun is not a firearm within the meaning of Penal Code section 16520. (All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.)
Comments on P. v. Perez CA4/3