P. v. Ross
Defendants Lorenzo Ross and Joel Armine Arnold appeal from judgments of conviction after a joint jury trial. Ross and Arnold contend that the trial court (1) erred in failing to instruct the jury on the issue of whether a "special relationship" existed between one of the victims and his sister and her boyfriend, who were the owners of a PlayStation game system that the defendants stole from the victims, such that defendants could be convicted of robbery as to that victim; (2) abused its discretion in limiting defense counsel's cross-examination of one of the victims concerning compensation that she received for expenses related to relocating from the apartment where the crime occurred; and (3) erred in permitting the prosecutor to elicit testimony from the gang expert regarding their prior contacts with police, on the grounds that the information was inadmissible hearsay, and that its introduction was more prejudicial than probative, as well as on the grounds that the admission of this evidence violated their confrontation clause and due process rights.
Ross separately contends that the trial court erred in instructing the jury on the aiding and abetting doctrine, as applied in this case, by telling the jury that he was "equally guilty" of the crime as the direct perpetrator, even though he could have been found guilty of a lesser crime than the direct perpetrator. Finally, Ross contends that there is insufficient evidence to uphold his conviction for assault with a firearm on an aiding and abetting theory.
We conclude that none of the defendants' claims on appeal provides a ground for reversal or modification of the judgments. We therefore affirm the judgments of the trial court.
Comments on P. v. Ross