People v. Correa CA4/1
Filed 10/24/24 P. v. Correa CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THE PEOPLE, D082602
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v. (Super. Ct. No. SCD290802)
MOISES ARTHUR CORREA,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Jeffrey F. Fraser, Judge. Affirmed. Spolin & Dukes, Aaron Spolin and Caitlin Dukes for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Assistant Attorney General, Collette C. Cavalier, Kathryn Kirschbaum and James H. Flaherty III, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. Moises Arthur Correa appeals the denial of a motion to sever two counts of robbery (Pen. Code, § 211; counts 2 & 3) from one count of assault with a deadly weapon on a police officer (§ 245, subd. (c); count 1). He claims
the trial court abused its discretion because joinder was improper based on three relevant prejudice factors. Specifically, he claims (1) evidence of the different charges would not have been cross-admissible in separate trials, (2) the assault charge inflamed the jury and compelled conviction on the robberies, and (3) the stronger assault evidence compelled conviction on the robberies despite weaker evidence. We disagree and affirm. I. On June 26, 2021, Correa carried a black handgun into a gas station store, robbed the kiosk, and fled with several dozen packs of cigarettes and cash. On June 29, Correa committed a similar robbery at a discount store, but this time he threatened to shoot the clerk and fled with only a stolen tote bag. Surveillance footage from the gas station robbery showed Correa wearing a black baseball cap and brand-name shoes with “checkers” patterned sides. On July 8, a police officer initiated a traffic stop on a speeding black car. The car at first pulled over, but when the officer dismounted his motorcycle and took “one or two steps towards” the car, it “drove off.” The officer returned to his motorcycle and a chase ensued. After entering a dead-end road and turning around, the car “slamm[ed] on the brakes,” “quickly accelerat[ed]” in reverse, and struck the officer. The officer and his motorcycle slid several feet across the road, causing lasting injury to the officer’s leg. During the chase, the officer saw Correa in the driver’s seat of the car, and he later identified Correa in court. Although the car initially drove away from the scene, the car’s owner was quickly identified because the officer had seen the license plate. Investigators contacted the car’s owner and learned Correa was in possession
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)