P. v. Nunez CA2/8
It is undisputed that defendant Jose Nunez fatally shot his brother-in-law in the chest and head. At trial, defendant argued that he did not harbor malice because he unreasonably believed that he acted in self-defense. Defendant was convicted of first degree murder, and firearm enhancements were found true. On appeal, defendant argues that the court failed to give sua sponte an instruction limiting evidence obtained in violation of Miranda v. Arizona for impeachment purposes. In the alternative, defendant contends that his counsel was ineffective for failing to request the instruction. These arguments lack merit and we affirm the conviction. We remand for resentencing because the law now affords a trial court discretion to strike a firearm enhancement under Penal Code section 12022.53, and the record does not reveal how the trial court would have exercised its discretion.
Comments on P. v. Nunez CA2/8