P. v. Robinson
A jury found Andre Jamal Robinson guilty of first degree murder (Pen. Code,[1] 187, subd. (a)) and found that Robinson personally used a firearm during the commission of the offense ( 12022.5, subd. (a).) In addition, the jury found true a special circumstance within the meaning of section 190.2, subdivision (a)(17), namely, that Robinson committed the murder while he was engaged in the commission of a rape ( 261). The trial court sentenced Robinson to life without the possibility of parole.
On appeal, Robinson claims that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury sua sponte on the offense of being an accessory after the fact. Robinson also claims that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because his trial counsel failed to request a jury instruction on the offense of accessory after the fact. Court conclude that Robinson was not entitled to have the jury instructed on an offense that is neither a lesser included offense nor a defense to the charged offense. In addition, Robinson claims that the trial court erred in instructing the jury pursuant to CALCRIM No. 224, regarding the manner in which the jury was to consider circumstantial evidence. Court reject this claim as well and affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Robinson