P. v. Arzola
Filed 8/9/06 P. v. Arzola CA2/8
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION EIGHT
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JUAN ARZOLA, Defendant and Appellant. | B183397 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA056188) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County.
Bob S. Bowers, Judge. Conditionally reversed and remanded.
J. Kahn, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Susan Martynec and Kenneth N. Sokoler, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
In 2005, a jury convicted appellant, Juan Arzola, of a murder that occurred in 1992. On appeal, Arzola demonstrates the court erred in (1) finding that his Pitchess[1] motion lacked good cause, (2) admitting evidence of uncharged crimes, and (3) denying him conduct credits based on statutes that were not yet operative in 1992. We modify his sentence, conclude the evidentiary error was harmless, and remand the case to the trial court to consider, in camera, the documents in Detective John Curiel's personnel file. If the court finds that there is discoverable information and that there is a reasonable probability the evidence would have led to a more favorable verdict, then it must order a new trial. If either condition is not satisfied, the court should reinstate Arzola's conviction.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
The sole issue at trial was identity, and no witnesses testified in favor of the defense. The prosecutor argued that appellant, a drug dealer, shot the victim, Gino Orange, after a drug transaction. There was no dispute that the shooting occurred in Lafayette Park or that Orange died as a result of a gunshot wound to his head.[2]
Back in 1992, two eyewitnesses, Brigette Frye and Sylvia Mejia, identified appellant from a photo lineup as the perpetrator, and both knew him as â€
