People v. Williams CA1/4

Filed 6/23/14 P. v. Williams CA1/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A138556 v. KARIBU ALATIF WILLIAMS, (Contra Costa County Super. Ct. No. 51204676) Defendant and Appellant.

I. INTRODUCTION Appellant Karibu Alatif Williams appeals following a jury trial which resulted in his conviction for second degree robbery (Pen. Code, §§ 211, 212.5, subd. (c)).1 He contends the trial court prejudicially erred in delivering to the jury two written instructions which had been withdrawn by counsel, and which, therefore, had not been orally read by the court. We agree that the trial court erred in including these two withdrawn instructions in the jury’s packet of written instructions, but we find the error to have been harmless. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment and sentence.

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code, unless otherwise indicated. In addition to his second degree robbery conviction, following a bifurcated court trial, the court found true a prior conviction and strike allegation. Those findings are not challenged or material to this appeal.

1

II. GENERAL PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUNDS A criminal information was filed on March 20, 2012, by the Contra Costa County District Attorney alleging that appellant had committed second degree robbery (§§ 211, 212.5, subd. (c)) of Eric Rojo. The information also alleged appellant was armed with a handgun at the time of the robbery within the meaning of section12022, subdivision (a)(1)), and that he used a handgun in the commission of the offense within the meaning of section 12022.53, subdivision (b). The information further alleged that appellant had a prior conviction of first degree burglary, a violent felony, and a “strike.” (§§ 459, 460, subd. (a), 667, subd. (a)(1), 1170.12, subds. (b)–(i)). A jury trial commenced on March 12, 2013. The evidence material to the issues before us included the following: On the morning of January 18, 2012, Eric Rojo was walking on 24th Street in Richmond toward his class at the Richmond Civic Center. He had $48 in cash on his person—$3 consisting of three single bills in his pocket, and $45 consisting of one $5 and two $20 bills, in his wallet. Appellant rode his bicycle on the sidewalk toward Rojo and looked at him. Rojo moved into the street to avoid any confrontation. Appellant rode up to Rojo, stopped, and ordered, “Give me a dollar.” Rojo replied, “I don’t have a dollar,” and kept walking. Appellant then circled around Rojo, blocking his forward progress. Appellant again ordered, “Give me a dollar” and “I’m not playing around.” Rojo looked to see if appellant had a weapon. He saw what appeared to be bottom of the handle of a handgun inside the pouch of appellant’s black hooded sweatshirt. Rojo was scared and gave appellant the $3 he had in his pocket. Appellant then said, “I know you have more.” Rojo pulled out his wallet, showed it to appellant, and handed the rest of his money over to appellant. Appellant rode off on his bike. Rojo, walked back to his house on 23rd Street. He told his cousin, Ignacio Jaime, that he just been robbed. Jaime said to call the police, but Rojo instead wanted to look for appellant and to call police if they saw him.