P. v. Sedano
A jury convicted defendant Christian Martinez Sedano of vandalism (§ 594, subd. (a))[1] with the finding that he had committed the crime for the benefit of a street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(A)). After defendant admitted a 2008 robbery conviction (§ 211), the trial court sentenced him to six-year term.
In this appeal, defendant contends that the evidence is insufficient to sustain his conviction. We disagree. He also contends that trial counsel provided ineffective assistance because he did not object to a portion of the gang expert’s testimony and that the trial court erred in failing to submit CALCRIM No. 358. We find no prejudicial error and therefore affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Sedano