People v. Haygood CA5

California Court of Appeal Mar 4, 2026 No. F088446Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. Following an independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende, the court affirmed the trial court's judgment, which included the denial of the defendant's motion for a new trial and his resentencing to life without the possibility of parole.

Issues

Whether there is any arguable error in the trial court's denial of the defendant's motion for a new trial following remand.
Whether there is any arguable error in the trial court's resentencing of the defendant.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Following independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), we affirm the judgment.”

“After an independent review of the record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to Haygood.”

Filed 3/4/26 P. v. Haygood CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, F088446 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. F18906596) v.

KYRONE JARAY HAYGOOD, JR., OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Houry A. Sanderson, Judge. Candace Hale, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Detjen, Acting P. J., Peña, J. and Meehan, J.

Defendant Kyrone Jaray Haygood, Jr., appeals from a July 30, 2024, judgment of the Fresno County Superior Court. Following independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), we affirm the judgment. BACKGROUND1 Haygood was charged with the murder of Brandon S. (Pen. Code,2 § 187, subd. (a)). The information further alleged he personally and intentionally discharged a firearm that proximately caused the victim’s death (§ 12022.53, subd. (d)) and committed the murder while he was engaged in the commission or attempted commission of a qualifying felony, i.e., robbery (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17)). Following trial, the jury found Haygood guilty of first degree murder and found true the special allegations. Haygood filed a new trial motion pursuant to section 1181, subdivision 6, which was denied. He was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole (LWOP) plus 25 years to life for the firearm discharge enhancement. Previously on appeal, Haygood contended: (1) the evidence did not support his murder conviction; (2) the trial court erroneously read CALCRIM No. 540B (Felony Murder: First Degree—Coparticipant Allegedly Committed Fatal Act) to the jury; (3) the prosecutor misinformed the jury about the felony-murder rule in her summation; (4) the court erroneously excluded a prosecution witness’s prior arrest as evidence of third-party culpability; (5) a prosecution witness’s “self-proclaimed ability to tell if someone is being truthful or lying tainted the impartiality of the jury” (italics & capitalization omitted); (6) certain testimony of a prosecution witness constituted “improper burden shifting to the defense” (boldface & some capitalization omitted); (7) a prosecution witness’s

People v. Haygood CA5

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief