P. v. Modesto
Miguel Angel Modesto was convicted of one count of robbery for taking a bicycle with force (Pen. Code, § 211[1]), and one count of promoting felonious conduct by members of a street gang, a crime sometimes called street terrorism. (§ 186.22, subd. (a).)[2] In this case, the street terrorism count was based on the theory he took the bicycle for the benefit of his gang, the “Family Mob.†However, in supplemental briefing the Attorney General’s office has recognized that in light of People v. Rodriguez (2012) 55 Cal.4th 1125, 1139, and the absence of any evidence Modesto acted collectively with other gang members, the street terrorism count cannot stand – the crime only applies to actions done collectively with other gang members. (Ibid.)
That leaves remaining the two arguments Modesto originally raised in his opening brief as the subject of this appeal: (1) Whether there was substantial evidence Modesto used force to take the bicycle and (2) whether the trial judge’s comments during the trial evidenced judicial bias.
Comments on P. v. Modesto