P. v. Cons
Defendant Mark Cons appeals from a judgment after a jury convicted him of 11 counts of second degree robbery. (Pen. Code, § 211.)[1] He argues the trial court abused its discretion in denying his request to present evidence of third-party culpability and that the three counts based on a robbery of a Taco Bell restaurant were not supported by substantial evidence. We disagree and affirm the judgment, modifying some of the fees and fines.
Comments on P. v. Cons