P. v. Libich CA2/3
Defendant Martin Libich was convicted of aiding and abetting his then-girlfriend’s stalking and electronic harassment of Leandra Y., his ex-girlfriend, and electronic harassment of Lux Y., his child with Leandra. On appeal, he argues we must reverse the stalking conviction because one of the aiding-and-abetting instructions misidentified the victim as Lux rather than Leandra. Although we agree the instruction was confusing, we conclude that the prosecutor’s closing argument resolved the ambiguity and that it is not reasonably likely the jury misunderstood the relevant legal principles. Defendant also argues—and the People concede—that Assembly Bill No. 1950 (2019–2020 Reg. Sess.) (A.B. 1950), which reduced maximum felony probation terms to two years, applies to him retroactively because it became effective while his appeal was pending. Defendant asks us to reduce the term of his probation on appeal whereas the People urge us to remand. We conclude that under the circumstances
Comments on P. v. Libich CA2/3