People v. Zadurian CA2/8

Filed 12/11/14 P. v. Zadurian CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 EIGHT

THE PEOPLE, B248462

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA340283) v.

VREJ ZADURIAN,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Ronald Coen, Judge. Affirmed.

John P. Dwyer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Assistant Attorney General, Stephanie A. Miyoshi and Nima Razfar, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

__________________________

Vrej Zadurian appeals from his conviction of special circumstance felony murder and first degree robbery. His sole contention on appeal is that the felony murder special circumstance statute (Pen. Code, § 190.2, subd. (a)(17)) violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.1 We affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The nature of defendant’s contention makes a detailed recitation of the facts unnecessary. It is sufficient to state that, viewed in accordance with the usual rules on appeal (People v. Zamudio (2008) 43 Cal.4th 327, 357-358 (Zamudio)), the evidence established that at about noon on November 1, 2005, Christopher Shahnazari was at home with his mother when defendant and two other men perpetrated a home invasion robbery during which Christopher was fatally shot. In a statement to police, defendant admitted participating in the robbery and shooting Christopher. Defendant was charged with first degree murder committed during the commission of a robbery and burglary (count 1; § 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(A), (G)) and first degree robbery (count 2; § 211); prior convictions pursuant to the Three Strikes law (§ 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d), § 667, subds. (b)-(i)) and firearm enhancements were also alleged. A jury found defendant guilty on both counts and found true a section 12022.53, subdivision (b) firearm enhancement; the remaining firearm enhancements were dismissed. Defendant admitted the strike allegation. For felony murder (count 1), defendant was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole plus an additional 10 years for the gun use; for first degree robbery (count 2), the trial court imposed but stayed a term of life in prison pursuant to the Three Strikes law. Defendant timely appealed.