P. v. Ross
Rodney Ross appeals from the judgment entered after a jury convicted him of robbery, petty theft and resisting, obstructing or delaying a peace officer. He contends that the trial court erred when it found him competent to stand trial. Because the court's finding of competency is supported by substantial evidence, we uphold it.
Ross also contends, and the People concede, that he could not be convicted properly of both robbery and petty theft. These convictions are based on the same course of conduct. Petty theft is a lesser, necessarily included offense of robbery. Accordingly, Court reverse the petty theft conviction.
Comments on P. v. Ross