P. v. Mendoza
Fernando Mendoza and Guadalupe Ruiz Ayala appeal from judgments after a jury convicted them of attempted murder and two counts of aggravated assault and found true great bodily injury enhancements. Mendoza argues the trial court erroneously admitted one of the victims statements as a spontaneous declaration, the admission of Ayalas statement to his sister and father violated his Sixth Amendment rights, the court erroneously admitted other acts evidence, and there was cumulative error. Ayala argues the trial court erroneously admitted the same other acts evidence, insufficient evidence supports the jurys finding on the enhancement he personally inflicted great bodily injury on one of the victims, and the court erroneously instructed the jury on the great bodily injury enhancement. In supplemental briefing, Ayala contends the trial court erroneously imposed a criminal conviction assessment and ordered he register as a gang member. Mendoza and Ayala also join in each others arguments to the extent they accrue to their own benefit.
As Court explain below, with the exception of one of Ayalas sentencing claims, none of the contentions have merit. With respect to Mendoza, Court affirm the judgment, and as to Ayala, Court affirm the judgment as modified.
Comments on P. v. Mendoza