P. v.
Filed 9/28/10 P. v. Burton CA2/5
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 This opinion has not been certified for
publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115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
SECOND
APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION
FIVE
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
JIMMY LEE BURTON,
Defendant and Appellant.
B216446
(Los Angeles
County Super.
Ct.
No. TA093292)
APPEAL from
a judgment of the Superior Court
of Los Angeles
County, John T. Doyle, Judge.
Affirmed.
George O.
Benton, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Edmund G.
Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney
General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Scott A.
Taryle, Eric J. Kohm and David A. Wildman, Deputy Attorneys General, for
Plaintiff and Respondent.
_________________________________
A jury
found defendant and appellant Jimmy Burton guilty of the second degree murder
of Keith Hardy (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a)),[1] finding the offense was committed for the
benefit of a criminal street gang (§
186.22, subd. (b)(1)(C)).[2] Defendant was sentenced to 15 years to
life. In his timely appeal, defendant
contends (1) the trial court's admission
of redacted recordings of jailhouse conversations between defendant, codefendant,
and two others violated his federal
constitutional right to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses,
(2) the trial court erroneously failed
to adequately instruct the jury on the prosecution's burden of proving identity
for the purpose of a third party culpability defense, (3) the trial court erroneously and prejudicially
failed to instruct the jury that statements by accomplices must be corroborated
and viewed with caution, and (4) the
trial court erroneously failed to instruct the jury that the prosecution
eyewitness Desiree S. had received an offer of leniency. Defendant further contends the cumulative
effect of the alleged errors requires reversal.
We affirm.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
Desiree S.
was 17 years old at the time of the shooting incident on the evening of June 4, 2007. She lived in Compton
and was familiar with the Compton Transit
Center, which was located on Willowbrook
Avenue across from the Greyhound station. She was at the transit center at the time of
the shooting. It was still light
outside. Desiree arrived at the transit
center after a train trip from Carson,
and she had her bicycle with her.
Desiree walked her bicycle from the train platform toward the bus
station. As she approached a stop sign,
an African-American male, similar to her age, came up and asked, â€
| Description | A jury found defendant and appellant Jimmy Burton guilty of the second degree murder of Keith Hardy (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a)),[1] finding the offense was committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(C)).[2] Defendant was sentenced to 15 years to life. In his timely appeal, defendant contends (1) the trial court's admission of redacted recordings of jailhouse conversations between defendant, codefendant, and two others violated his federal constitutional right to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses, (2) the trial court erroneously failed to adequately instruct the jury on the prosecution's burden of proving identity for the purpose of a third party culpability defense, (3) the trial court erroneously and prejudicially failed to instruct the jury that statements by accomplices must be corroborated and viewed with caution, and (4) the trial court erroneously failed to instruct the jury that the prosecution eyewitness Desiree S. had received an offer of leniency. Defendant further contends the cumulative effect of the alleged errors requires reversal. Cout affirm. |
| Rating |
