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. Nathan Alexander Espinoza

December 19, 2012

THE PEOPLE, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
v.
NATHAN ALEXANDER ESPINOZA, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.



(Super. Ct. No. 095822)

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

P. v. Espinoza 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

A jury convicted defendant Nathan Alexander Espinoza of second degree robbery, conspiracy to commit robbery, receiving stolen property, conspiracy to evade a peace officer, and resisting or obstructing a peace officer. The trial court sentenced him to an aggregate term of three years in prison.

Defendant contends his convictions for robbery and conspiracy to commit robbery must be reversed because the trial court prejudicially erred in instructing the jury with CALCRIM No. 1603 [robbery: intent of aider and abettor]. Although he concedes that CALCRIM No. 1603 is a correct statement of the law, he contends the instruction was erroneous as applied to the facts of this case.

We conclude defendant's contention is forfeited because he did not ask the trial court for an amplifying or clarifying instruction on this issue. We will affirm the judgment.

BACKGROUND

Co-defendant Aaron Dufour entered a Taco Bell restaurant in Woodland, concealing his identity. He displayed what appeared to be a firearm and ordered Taco Bell employee Leticia Ayala to give him cash in a bag. Dufour then returned to the parking lot and got into a gray car, which drove onto Interstate 5. Police were alerted and arrived within five minutes.

Davis Police Officer Pheng Ly, patrolling in Davis, received an alert from the Woodland Police Department regarding the Taco Bell robbery, including a description of the getaway vehicle. Officer Ly subsequently saw a Pontiac resembling the car described in the alert. The car did not have a front license plate and its windows were tinted. Officer Ly tried to get behind the Pontiac to make a vehicle stop for the Vehicle Code violations, but the Pontiac drove onto Interstate 80 and accelerated. Officer Ly accelerated to 110 miles per hour but did not catch up. He notified dispatch of the pursuit and the need for backup.

Officer Ly followed the Pontiac onto Mace Boulevard and activated his lights. The Pontiac drove over 100 miles per hour on Second Street. Three other police officers joined Officer Ly in pursuit of the Pontiac. The Pontiac crashed and two people fled from the car. Dufour was apprehended after a 20-minute search. He said he was a passenger in the Pontiac.

Police determined that defendant owned the Pontiac. Executing a search warrant on the Pontiac, an officer found money inside a Taco Bell bag, a black soft air gun inside a duffel bag, cell phones belonging to defendant and Dufour, and a wallet with defendant's identification. Executing a search warrant at defendant's residence, officers found Dufour's car in the parking lot of the apartment complex. Ayala identified the Pontiac with 90 percent certainty as the car she saw in the Taco Bell parking lot.

Defendant was arrested. He claimed he had been at his girlfriend's house fixing a flat tire on his car and locked his keys, cell phone and wallet in the car. He said the car was subsequently stolen.

The jury convicted defendant of second degree robbery (Pen. Code, §§ 211, 212.5, subd. (c) -- count 3),*fn1 conspiracy to commit robbery (§§ 182, subd. (a)(1)/211, 212.5, subd. (c) -- count 4), conspiracy to evade a peace officer (§§ 182, subd. (a)(1)/Veh. Code, § 2800.2, subd. (a) -- count 6), receiving stolen property (§ 496, subd. (a) ...


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.