legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Sisala CA4/1
A jury convicted Khen Sisala of residential burglary (Pen. Code, §§ 459, 460, subd. (a)) after he was caught walking out of an apartment he broke into. He argues his conviction must be reversed on four grounds: (1) the prosecution violated Brady v. Maryland (1963) 373 U.S. 83 (Brady) when it failed to disclose recordings from police officers' body-worn cameras before the preliminary hearing; (2) the police failed to preserve evidence regarding his psychological state or intoxication that might have been exculpatory on the issue of his intent to steal; (3) by giving an unmodified version of the voluntary intoxication instruction with an instruction on consciousness of guilt (CALCRIM No. 362), the court erroneously limited the jury from considering whether intoxication prevented Sisala from knowingly making false statements; and (4) the court should have instructed the jury that trespass was a lesser included offense to burglary. We reject each contention and affirm.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale