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. Tami Lynette Simpson

September 17, 2012

THE PEOPLE, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
v.
TAMI LYNETTE SIMPSON, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.



(Super. Ct. No. CRF0956)

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Murray , J.

P. v. Simpson

CA3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

Following a jury trial, defendant Tami Lynette Simpson was convicted of second degree burglary (Pen. Code, § 459) and passing a false check (id., § 470, subd. (d)). The trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed defendant on three years' probation, subject to various terms and conditions.

On appeal, defendant contends: 1) the trial court violated her constitutional rights to confrontation, to present a defense, and to a fair trial by excluding impeachment evidence; 2) excluding the impeachment evidence under Evidence Code section 352 was an abuse of discretion; 3) she received ineffective assistance of counsel because her attorney failed to object to the trial court's ruling based on Evidence Code sections 780 and 1101, subdivision (c); and 4) the trial court's finding that defendant has the ability to pay certain fees is not supported by substantial evidence.

We affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Sonia Madaan's husband owns the 99 Cent & Liquor Store in Wheatland. Madaan often works at the store, which is also a registered check-cashing business. On December 24, 2008, Madaan cashed a check for $730.02 for a person named Tami Lynette Simpson, later identified as defendant.

Madaan asked defendant for identification before cashing the check. She looked at the picture on the identification, compared it to defendant, and determined it was the same person. Madaan wrote the identification number on the back of the check. She charged defendant $16 to cash the check, and gave the remainder to defendant in cash.

Defendant was in the store for five to seven minutes. Madaan realized the check was fake a few seconds after defendant left the store. She ran after defendant, but defendant was already leaving in a car. Madaan did not get the license plate number of the car. According to Madaan, the security cameras were not working in the store at the time.

Madaan identified defendant as the perpetrator in a photographic lineup and at trial. She remembered defendant because this incident was the first time she had cashed a fraudulent check.

Wheatland Police Officer Oscar Magana ran the identification number on the check through the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) database, found a photograph associated with that number, and determined the identification was issued to Tami Lynette Simpson.*fn1 On January 7, 2009, Officer Magana administered the photographic lineup to Madaan. Madaan was sure the person she identified in the lineup was the person who had cashed the check.

The fraudulent check was signed "Janice Simpson." Officer Magana thought the signature on the driver's license or identification card read "Janice Simpson." The DMV printout indicated the identification card or driver's license associated with the identification number on the check had originally been issued on April 19, 2005. The printout also indicated a duplicate had been issued on December 24, 2008 -- the same day the check was cashed.

Madaan told Officer Magana that there was no video surveillance on the day of the incident because the "memory was full." She also said that the woman drove away in a green sports utility vehicle.

The parties stipulated that the check was fake or fraudulent.

DISCUSSION

I. Other Check or Checks

the Defense Sought to Use for ...


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.