P. v. Dean
Faith Eileen Dean appeals her conviction for second degree robbery. She contends there was insufficient evidence to support her conviction. She argues the trial court abused its discretion by denying her motion for a continuance to investigate and produce a potential witness. She also argues the trial court committed reversible error by excluding her expert witness without giving her an opportunity to change her plea so as to make the experts proposed testimony admissible, and that her counsel was ineffective for not moving to change her plea. She contends that two jury instructions, CALCRIM No. 300 and CALCRIM No. 1600, were not correct statements of law. She further contends that a third jury instruction, CALCRIM No. 361, was not warranted by the evidence in this case. Finally, she asks that Court reverse based on the cumulative prejudicial effect of these errors combined, even if no single error requires reversal. Court find no prejudicial error, and affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Dean