P. v. Brown
Filed 6/13/11 P. v. Brown CA1/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. VICTOR D. BROWN, Defendant and Appellant. | A125923 (San Francisco County Super. Ct. No. 207496) |
Victor D. Brown (appellant) appeals from a judgment entered after a jury found him guilty of selling cocaine base (Health & Saf. Code, § 11352, subd. (a), count 1) and giving false information to a police officer (Pen. Code, § 148.9, subd. (a), count 3). He: (1) requests that we examine the documents the trial court reviewed in camera pursuant to Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531 (Pitchess) and determine whether the trial court properly exercised its discretion; and (2) contends the trial court violated his sixth amendment right to confrontation by precluding him from cross-examining police officers as to certain issues. He contends that even if the errors were harmless, their cumulative effect warrants reversal. We reject his contentions and affirm the judgment.
Factual and Procedural Background
On January 5, 2009, an information was filed charging appellant and co-defendant Eugene C. Bowden with sale of cocaine base (Health & Saf. Code, § 11352, subd. (a), count 1) and charging appellant with misdemeanor false personation (Pen. Code, § 529, count 2) and giving false information to a police officer (Pen. Code, § 148.9, subd. (a), count 3). The information further alleged as to appellant that he had a prior conviction for sale of a controlled substance.
At trial, San Francisco police officer Chandra Johnson testified that at about 2:15 p.m. on December 8, 2008, she was working undercover as a â€
| Description | Victor D. Brown (appellant) appeals from a judgment entered after a jury found him guilty of selling cocaine base (Health & Saf. Code, § 11352, subd. (a), count 1) and giving false information to a police officer (Pen. Code, § 148.9, subd. (a), count 3). He: (1) requests that we examine the documents the trial court reviewed in camera pursuant to Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531 (Pitchess) and determine whether the trial court properly exercised its discretion; and (2) contends the trial court violated his sixth amendment right to confrontation by precluding him from cross-examining police officers as to certain issues. He contends that even if the errors were harmless, their cumulative effect warrants reversal. We reject his contentions and affirm the judgment. |
| Rating |
