Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

The People v. Benerito Felipe Gabaldon

December 2, 2010

THE PEOPLE, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
v.
BENERITO FELIPE GABALDON, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Richli Acting P.J.

P. v. Gabaldon CA4/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

OPINION

APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. William S. Lebov, Judge. (Retired judge of the Yolo Super. Ct., sitting under assignment by the Chief Justice pursuant to art. VI, § 6 of the Cal. Const.) Affirmed.

Gerald J. Miller, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gary W. Schons, Assistant Attorney General, and Rhonda Cartwright-Ladendorf and Scott C. Taylor, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

A jury found defendant and appellant Benerito Felipe Gabaldon guilty of robbery. (Pen. Code, § 211.)*fn1 In a bifurcated proceeding, the trial court found true that defendant had suffered seven prior serious and violent felony convictions (§§ 667, subds. (c), (e)(1), 1170.12, subd. (c)(1)), a prior serious felony conviction (§ 667, subd. (a)), and a prior prison term (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). As a result, defendant was sentenced to a total term of 31 years to life in state prison. Defendant's sole contention on appeal is that the trial court prejudicially erred in denying his motion for mistrial based on prosecutorial misconduct. We reject this contention and affirm the judgment.

I FACTUAL BACKGROUND

On September 25, 2007, about 11:00 a.m., Sheila Entwistle was walking with her nine-year-old daughter outside an Albertson's grocery store in Blythe. As they were walking, with Entwistle alongside the curb and carrying her purse by its straps, Entwistle heard a car approach her from behind. Entwistle turned around and saw a gray or silver Chrysler four-door sedan, about 5 to 10 feet from her, traveling at approximately five miles per hour. According to a nearby Rite-Aid store employee, the car and its two male occupants had been cruising around the parking lot since about 10:00 a.m.

As the car came closer to her, Entwistle saw a male, identified as defendant, lean out the open passenger window of the car. Defendant reached out with one of his arms and snatched the straps of Entwistle's purse and began pulling. As the car increased its speed, Entwistle and defendant struggled for the purse. During the struggle, the strap of the purse broke, allowing defendant to leave the scene with the purse.

About 40 minutes later, Arizona Department of Public Safety Officer John Gigous was on routine patrol on Interstate 10 when he determined the vehicle in which defendant was the passenger was stolen. Officer Gigous conducted a traffic stop on the vehicle and searched it. During the search, Entwistle's purse was found under the passenger seat where defendant had been seated. The purse contained Entwistle's driver's license, "two Mexico ID cards and a Nevada driver's license." The name on the other identification cards was Maria Sobeyda Agramon. Both the driver and defendant stated they did not know to whom the purse belonged. Officer Gigous contacted the Blythe Police Department and discovered there had been a report of a stolen purse.

Subsequently, Entwistle and her daughter were driven to the location of the car for an infield identification of defendant and the car. Both Entwistle and her daughter separately identified defendant as the robber and the car as the one used during the robbery. Entwistle also identified her purse, as well as the contents of the purse. She noted that her purse was missing about $20 to $30 and a pair ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.