P. v. Lopez
A jury convicted Raymundo Lopez and Vincent Rodriguez for crimes arising from an armed carjacking and a subsequent shooting of a police officer, who was shot three times. The defendants were convicted as follows: in count 1, both defendants were convicted of premeditated attempted murder of a police officer (Pen. Code, 187, subd. (a), & 664);[1]in count 2, Lopez was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm ( 12021, subd. (a)(1)); in count 3, Lopez was convicted of unlawfully driving or taking a vehicle (Veh. Code, 10851, subd. (a)); in count 4, Lopez was convicted of receiving stolen property ( 496, subd. (a)); and, in count 5, Rodriguez was convicted of a carjacking ( 215, subd. (a).). The jury found true that both defendants committed the crime in count 1 and Rodriguez committed the crime in count 5 for the benefit of a criminal street gang ( 186.22, subd. (b)(4)). The jury also found true a number of firearm enhancement allegations, including that Rodriguez personally used a firearm ( 12022.53, subd. (b)) and that Lopez, who also was acting as the principal for Rodriguez, personally used and discharged a firearm causing great bodily injury ( 12022.53, subds. (b), (c), (d), & (e)(1)). Rodriguez was sentenced to 65 years to life and Lopez was sentenced to 40 years to life.
In appealing his judgment, Rodriguez challenges on evidentiary and constitutional grounds the application of the natural and probable consequences doctrine as the basis for his attempted murder conviction. Rodriguez also raises an equal protection challenge to the criminal street gang provision of the firearm enhancement statute. In his appeal, Lopez claims the criminal street gang enhancement for his attempted murder conviction must be reversed because it was not alleged in the information. Lopez also asserts a claim under Blakely v. Washington (2004) 542 U.S. 296.
For the reasons provided below, Court reject the claims of both defendants and affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Lopez