People v. Jackson CA2/1

California Court of Appeal Oct 24, 2013 No. B241547Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the defendant's convictions for drug offenses, holding that trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to raise a confrontation clause objection, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting prior convictions for impeachment, and the trial court properly denied the motion to strike a prior strike conviction.

Issues

Whether trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to object to rebuttal testimony on confrontation clause grounds.
Whether the trial court abused its discretion by admitting the defendant's prior felony convictions and probationary status for impeachment.
Whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to dismiss a prior strike conviction under People v. Superior Court (Romero).

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Jackson’s counsel was not unreasonable in failing to object on a constitutional ground that did not apply.”

“We decline to apply such a requirement to the question of whether the trial court abused its considerable discretion, and we conclude that no abuse of discretion occurred.”

“As we see no extraordinary circumstances, we conclude the trial court’s ruling on the Romero motion was not an abuse of discretion.”

Filed 10/24/13 P. v. Jackson CA2/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

THE PEOPLE, B241547

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA382396) v.

ROBERT RAY JACKSON III,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Leslie A. Swain, Judge. Affirmed. Phillip I. Bronson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Shawn McGahey Webb and Taylor Nguyen, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. _________________________________

A jury convicted Robert Ray Jackson III of one count of sale of cocaine base and one count of possession of cocaine base for purposes of sale. Jackson timely appealed, and we affirm. BACKGROUND An information filed May 11, 2011 charged Jackson with two counts of sale of cocaine base in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11352, subdivision (a) (counts 1 and 2) and one count of possession of cocaine base for sale in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11351.5 (count 3), all on March 22, 2011. The information also alleged that Jackson had a prior strike under Penal Code sections 667, subdivisions (b) through (i) and 1170.12, subdivisions (a) through (d), and had two prior prison terms under Penal Code section 667.5, subdivision (b). Jackson pleaded not guilty and denied the special allegations. After trial, a jury acquitted Jackson on count 1 and convicted him on the remaining two counts. In a bifurcated proceeding, Jackson admitted his prior strike and prior prison terms as alleged. The trial court denied probation and sentenced Jackson to eight years in state prison, consisting of the midterm of four years on count 2, doubled to eight years under the “Three Strikes” law, and imposed the midterm of four years on count 3, which the court stayed under Penal Code section 654. Jackson was ordered to pay fines and received presentence custody credit. The prosecution presented evidence at trial that on March 22, 2011, the Rampart Narcotics Enforcement Unit of the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) was conducting an undercover operation at 8th Street and Alvarado near California Donuts, after many complaints about sales of rock cocaine at that location. Officer Marco Oropeza approached a man later identified as “McCormick,” and asked, “‘Where can I get a 20,’” meaning $20 worth of rock cocaine. McCormick asked for the money, and Officer Oropeza gave him a $20 bill that had been “prerecorded,” or photocopied at the station so that the bills could be tracked by the serial numbers. McCormick took the $20, and then stepped away and made a call on his cell phone. After the conversation,

People v. Jackson CA2/1

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

THE PEOPLE, B241547

ROBERT RAY JACKSON III,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

JOHNSON, J.

MALLANO, P. J.

CHANEY, J.

AI Brief