P. v. Sedej
A jury convicted John Michael Sedej of committing gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, causing the death of Nancy Ramirez (Pen. Code, § 191.5, subd. (a); count 1); driving under the influence of alcohol causing bodily injury (Veh. Code, § 23153, subd. (a); count 2); and, driving while having a blood alcohol level of 0.08 percent or more causing bodily injury (Veh. Code, § 23153, subd. (b); count 3). It found the following allegations to be true: While Sedej was driving, he proximately caused bodily injury or death to more than one victim, to wit, Patricia Ramirez and Maria Elena Ramirez,[1] in the commission of counts 1, 2 and 3 (Veh. Code, § 23558); he personally inflicted great bodily injury on Nancy in the commission of counts 2 and 3 (Pen. Code, § 12022.7, subd. (a)); and he drove with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.15 percent or more in the commission of counts 2 and 3 (Veh. Code, § 23578). As to count 1, the jury found not true that Sedej personally inflicted great bodily injury on Patricia. (Pen. Code, § 12022.7, subd. (a).) The court sentenced Sedej to an aggregate term of six years, staying the sentence on counts 2 and 3 under Penal Code section 654.[2]
Sedej contends: (1) the convictions for counts 2 and 3 should be reversed because both are necessarily included offenses of the conviction in count 1; (2) there was insufficient evidence to support a conviction in count 1; (3) his state and federal constitutional due process and confrontation rights were violated by the court's exclusion of evidence; 4) the court erroneously declined his request to instruct the jury regarding unanimity; (5) the prosecutor committed prejudicial misconduct during closing arguments; and (6) the court erroneously denied him probation. We reverse the true findings on the Penal Code section 12022.7, subdivision (a) enhancements as to Nancy in counts 2 and 3. In all other respects, we affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Sedej