People v. Skinner CA2/1

Filed 7/29/15 P. v. Skinner CA2/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, B254848

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. NA096649) v.

MICHAEL SKINNER,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Arthur Jean, Jr., Judge. Affirmed as modified. Robert Booher, 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, Margaret E. Maxwell and Yun K. Lee, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ___________________________________

Michael Skinner was convicted of three counts of second degree robbery (Pen. Code, § 211)1 and the jury found true he personally used a firearm in commission of the robberies. On appeal he contends the prosecutor committed prejudicial misconduct by comparing reasonable doubt to Occam’s Razor during final argument and by stating Skinner had intimidated a prosecution witness from his seat at the defense table. He also contends he is entitled to 15 additional days of presentence custody credit. We conclude he is entitled to the 15 days but otherwise affirm. Background On March 31, 2013, defendant, wearing a backpack reversed so as to face forward on his chest, asked Miguel Hernandez for the time, then pulled a gun from the backpack, told Hernandez not to move, and took a ring and necklace from him. On April 10, 2013, defendant, again wearing a backpack in front, asked Alejandro Serrano for the time, then pulled a gun from the backpack, pointed it at Alejandro and his brother, Marcos Serrano, and demanded their phones, which he took. Five months later, when police informed defendant he was being charged with several armed robberies, he responded, “How can that be. There is no video. My prints were not recovered from the gun.” (The police had not mentioned a gun.) Defendant also said, unprompted, to a transporting officer who knew nothing about the case and had said nothing about it, “So wait, I am getting arrested for something I did a long time ago?” All three victims identified defendant as the robber from six-pack photograph lineups and again at the preliminary hearing, and Hernandez and Alejandro Serrano identified him a third time at trial. Marcos Serrano, however, recanted his identification at trial, testifying defendant was not the person who robbed him. Defendant’s girlfriend testified at trial that he could not have been the robber because he and she “were together every day.” When asked why she had not come