P. v. Zepeda
Defendant appeals from the judgment entered following a jury trial that resulted in his conviction of carjacking, robbery, assault with a firearm, assault with a deadly weapon or by means likely to produce great bodily injury, and burglary, as well as various enhancements. He contends: (1) the carjacking and burglary convictions were not supported by substantial evidence; (2) there were various sentencing errors; and (3) counsel was ineffective for failing to object to those sentencing errors. Court reverse and remand for resentencing and otherwise affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Zepeda