People v. Hampton CA2/4

California Court of Appeal Oct 21, 2015 No. B259664Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the defendant's conviction, holding that his claims regarding a lack of a signed probable cause determination and delayed arraignment were forfeited by failure to raise them in the trial court and lacked merit.

Issues

Whether the defendant's claim regarding an unsigned probable cause determination was forfeited.
Whether the defendant's claim regarding an untimely arraignment was forfeited.
Whether a delay in arraignment or lack of a signed probable cause determination requires reversal of a conviction absent a showing of prejudice.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“A defendant’s failure to raise a claim in the trial court that he was not provided with a determination of probable cause in a timely manner following his arrest forfeits the claim on appeal.”

“a delay in taking an arrestee before a magistrate for purposes of an arraignment cannot be raised for the first time on appeal.”

Filed 10/21/15 P. v. Hampton CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOUR

THE PEOPLE, B259664

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. YA088557) v.

ANTHONY L. HAMPTON,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Eric C. Taylor, Judge. Affirmed. James C. Huber, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Defendant and appellant Anthony L. Hampton appeals from the judgment entered following his no contest plea to a single count of robbery. (Pen. Code, § 211.)1 We affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND2 On October 3, 2013, Hampton entered a Burger King restaurant in Los Angeles County. Maria Andrade, her husband Victor Ramos, and their young daughter were seated around a table in the restaurant. Hampton grabbed Andrade’s purse from the table and fled the restaurant. Ramos chased Hampton and grabbed his wife’s purse. Hampton struck Ramos in the head, causing Ramos to bleed. Ramos released his grip on the purse, and Hampton resumed his flight. Shortly afterwards, deputies of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department observed Hampton running down the street, the purse in his hand, being pursued by Ramos. Hampton was apprehended by deputies and taken into custody at approximately 4:30 p.m. Soon after his arrest, Hampton made self- incriminating statements to the arresting officers. Hampton gave a statement to law enforcement the following morning, at approximately 8:00 a.m. on October 4, after waiving his Miranda rights. (Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436.) On October 7, 2013, a complaint was filed charging Hampton with one count of robbery in violation of section 211, and one count of resisting, obstructing, or delaying a peace officer in violation of section 148, subdivision (a)(1). The case was called for a preliminary hearing on November 18, 2013, and Hampton was held to answer on both counts. On December 3, 2013, Hampton was

People v. Hampton CA2/4

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

THE PEOPLE, B259664

ANTHONY L. HAMPTON,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

WILLHITE, J.

EPSTEIN, P. J.

COLLINS, J.

AI Brief