P. v. Barajas
A jury convicted defendant and appellant Jose Barajas of one count of second degree murder and one count of shooting at an occupied vehicle. His defense was self-defense. On appeal, Barajas contends that the trial court prejudicially erred by giving the jury an incorrect instruction on the distinction between murder and manslaughter and by not sua sponte instructing the jury with CALJIC No. 5.17 concerning imperfect self defense. He also contends that the trial court improperly excluded evidence of the victims character for violence and that there were sentencing errors. Court agree that there is an error in Barajass sentence, but Court disagree with his other contentions. Court therefore modify the judgment, and affirm it as modified.
Comments on P. v. Barajas