P. v. Gomez
Defendant Ruben Gomez appeals from a judgment of conviction for first degree murder and carrying a loaded firearm in a vehicle. It is undisputed that another man shot the victim, Daniel Menchaca; Gomez was prosecuted as an aider and abettor. Gomez contends that (1) the trial court erred when it instructed the jury that if the jury were to find the shooter guilty of first degree murder, then it must also find the aider and abettor guilty of first degree murder, under the natural and probable consequences doctrine; (2) the court erred in excluding a portion of a hearsay statement made by the shooter to the effect that in shooting the victim, the shooter had acted "before anybody could do anything;" (3) the court erred in admitting evidence of two prior uncharged bad acts; (4) the court erred in denying Gomez's motion to suppress evidence that police seized from his truck during a warrantless search; and (5) these errors constitute cumulative error.
We conclude that the trial court erred in instructing the jury that if it were to find the shooter guilty of first degree murder, it would have to find an aider and abettor guilty of first degree murder as well, under the natural and probable consequences doctrine. Court therefore reverse Gomez's conviction for first degree murder. If the People choose not to retry Gomez on that charge, then his conviction shall be modified to second degree murder. (See People v. Woods (1992) 8 Cal.App.4th 1570, 1596 (Woods).) Court conclude that Gomez's other arguments are without merit, and reject his claim of cumulative error.
Comments on P. v. Gomez