P. v. King
Defendant Keith Hallan King appeals after a jury found him guilty of residential burglary. (Pen. Code, §§ 459, 460, subd. (a).)[1] The trial court found true allegations that he had five prior convictions that qualified as strikes (§ 667, subds. (b)-(i)) and as serious felonies (§ 667, subd. (a)). He was sentenced to an determinate term of 29 years, consecutive to an indeterminate term of 25 years to life.
On appeal, defendant contends: (1) he should have been permitted to change his plea to not guilty by reason of insanity; (2) there was no corpus delicti for two of the three theories of burglary; (3) the victim’s 911 call should not have been admitted; (4) the prosecution should not have been permitted to amend the information during trial; (5) a defense expert’s testimony was improperly limited; (6) the prosecutor committed misconduct; (7) the trial court did not properly answer a jury question; (8) there was cumulative prejudice; and (9) the trial court erred by denying his motion to dismiss the strike allegations.
For reasons that we will explain, we will affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. King