People v. James CA5

Filed 4/3/14 P. v. James CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

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

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, F066355

v. (Super. Ct. No. 12CM7119)

DOMINIQUE SHQUNDA JAMES, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kings County. Steven D. Barnes, Judge. Jennifer A. Mannix, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Eric L. Christoffersen and Kevin L. Quade, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

 Before Kane, Acting P.J., Poochigian, J., and Franson, J.

A jury convicted appellant, Dominique Shqunda James, of possession of marijuana in a state prison (Pen. Code, § 4573.6), possession of drug paraphernalia in a state prison (Pen. Code, § 4573.6) and possession of drugs in a state prison (Pen. Code, § 4573.8). The court placed appellant on three years’ probation. Appellant argues that the testimony of two prosecution expert witnesses violated her Sixth Amendment confrontation rights because these witnesses, each of whom opined to the jury that the marijuana possessed by appellant was a usable amount, relied on out- of-court statements made by others in forming their opinions. Alternatively, she argues that if this contention is deemed forfeited by her counsel’s failure to object on confrontation grounds below, she was denied her Sixth Amendment right to the effective assistance of counsel. We affirm. FACTS On March 4, 2012, appellant, upon driving into a visitor’s parking lot at Corcoran State Prison, encountered Correctional Officer Craig Lane.1 Shortly thereafter, Lane asked appellant to step out of the car, at which point appellant reached to the area of the center console of the car and handed Lane a “black piece of plastic.” Lane looked inside the plastic and saw a green leafy substance, which was later determined to be marijuana, wadded up in the plastic. Lane further testified to the following: In his 23 years as a correctional officer, he has gained “experience in determining whether something is a usable quantity”2 through talking to “other correctional officers” and inmates “about what a usable quantity is[.]”