Fear Not Law Articles: P. v. Mendez

P. v. Mendez

Filed 9/6/06 P. v. Mendez CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

MANUEL MENDEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

G036078

(Super. Ct. No. 04CF1214)

O P I N I O N

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Richard W. Stanford, Jr., Judge. Affirmed.

Andrew E. Rubin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gary W. Schons, Assistant Attorney General, Barry Carlton and Stephanie H. Chow, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Appellant Manuel Mendez was convicted of carjacking and the jury found it true that he had personally used a firearm in the commission of the offense. He was sentenced to 15 years in state prison, but complains the court erred in excluding evidence he offered and restricting his attorney's closing argument. We find no errors and affirm.

* * *

After Manuel Mendez was arrested for carjacking, he was taken to an interview room to be interrogated by the police. At trial, his attorney, whose defense was based on the idea Mendez committed the crime after he â€

Description	Appellant was convicted of carjacking and the jury found it true that appellant had personally used a firearm in the commission of the offense. Appellant was sentenced to 15 years in state prison, but complains the court erred in excluding evidence appellant offered and restricting his attorney's closing argument. court find no errors and affirm.
Rating	0/5 1 2 3 4 5 0/5 based on 0 votes.