P. v. Holmes
Tamir Bilal Holmes appeals a judgment following his jury conviction on three counts of committing a lewd act on a child under the age of 14 years (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (a)).[1] On appeal, Holmes contends: (1) the trial court prejudicially erred by instructing with CALCRIM No. 318 that evidence of a witness's statements before trial could be used as evidence of the truth of the information in those statements; and (2) the abstract of judgment must be corrected to show his sentence is to run concurrently with his West Virginia prison term.[2] Because we conclude the trial court's instructional error was not prejudicial, we affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Holmes