P. v. Jaimes
Defendant and appellant Alfredo Jaimes appeals from the judgment entered following a jury trial that resulted in his conviction of second degree murder, four counts of attempted murder and shooting at an occupied motor vehicle. He contends: (1) the evidence establishes that the killing was in self-defense as a matter of law; (2) the evidence was insufficient to support the kill zone theory of attempted murder; (3) the evidence was insufficient to support the gang enhancements; (4) the trial court prejudicially erred in admitting evidence of an unrelated gang shooting; (5) he was denied due process as a result of the trial courts failure to give that portion of CALCRIM No. 3471 which discusses a sudden and perilous counter-assault; (6) the errors were cumulatively prejudicial; (7) he was denied his Sixth Amendment right of the United States Constitution to counsel of his choice; and (8) trial counsel was ineffective. Court affirm.
Comments on P. v. Jaimes