P. v. Sanford CA3
Defendant Adam James Sanford robbed two sets of victims in quick succession. After taking money from the second set of victims, he turned, ran, and fired his gun. A jury found him guilty of multiple crimes including robbery with a finding that he had intentionally discharged a firearm during the commission thereof.
On appeal, he contends the trial court erred in instructing the jury on the escape rule as it pertains to the firearm enhancement. He also challenges the prosecution’s failure to disclose the criminal history of one of the victims. Finally, he contends reversal is required to allow the trial court to consider striking the firearm enhancement pursuant to the newly enacted Senate Bill No. 620.
We agree with defendant’s final contention. We will remand to allow the trial court to exercise its newfound discretion under Senate Bill No. 620. We will also order a corrected abstract of judgment. In all other respects, we affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Sanford CA3