People v. Teate CA2/1
Filed 7/1/15 P. v. Teate CA2/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, B259203
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. MA062991) v.
KEVIN L. TEATE, JR.,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from the judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Charles A. Chung, Judge. Affirmed. ______ Trenton C. Packer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Gerald A. Engler, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Assistant Attorney General, Timothy M. Weiner and Michael Katz, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
______
A jury convicted defendant Kevin Teate, Jr., of burglary and the trial court sentenced him to two years in prison. He contends that the prosecutor committed prejudicial misconduct during closing argument by arguing facts not in evidence to vouch for the credibility of a prosecution witness. We hold that Teate forfeited this argument by failing to object at trial and, in any event, the prosecutor’s argument was not improper. FACTUAL SUMMARY 1. Summary of Evidence at Trial On the morning of May 12, 2014, someone broke into Christina Maloney’s house while she was away. Around 10:50 that morning, Paul Veronica observed a black woman at the front door of Maloney’s house. The woman rang the doorbell for several minutes and appeared “very nervous,” as if she was “afraid she was going to get caught.” Eventually, the woman walked to a car parked nearby. Veronica then noticed two black males standing in a planter area near the back of Maloney’s house “acting suspicious.” They were “just standing there and . . . looking at the girl in the car.” Veronica “just got a glimpse” of the men and could not identify them at trial. Around the same time, neighbors Rogelio and Leslie Villegas drove by Maloney’s house. From a distance of 20 or 30 feet Rogelio1 observed two unfamiliar black males standing on the corner waving their hands, and a woman in a black car nearby. A couple of minutes later, the Villegases drove past the same spot and Rogelio noticed that the two men were gone and the woman was still in the car. They became suspicious and called the police. Rogelio made a U-turn and drove back to the corner. He then saw the two men on top of a low wall outside Maloney’s house. One of them was wearing shorts and gloves, the other was wearing black and red pants. The man in shorts ran across the street, about 20 to 40 feet in front of the Villegases’ car, and into the desert. The man wearing black and red pants ran to the black car and got in the front passenger seat. Rogelio did not get
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)