People v. Armstrong CA3
Filed 4/25/16 P. v. Armstrong CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ----
THE PEOPLE, C078952
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 13F07165)
v.
JAKELYNN SUE ARMSTRONG,
Defendant and Appellant.
Defendant Jakelynn Sue Armstrong was convicted after a jury trial of residential burglary and second degree robbery. (Pen. Code, §§ 459, 211.)1 The jury found she was a principal in the commission of the robbery and was armed with a firearm. (§§ 31, 12022, subd. (a)(1).) The trial court also found she committed the robbery offense while released from custody on bail. (§ 12022.1.)
1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.
1
Sentenced to an aggregate term of five years four months in state prison, defendant appeals. She contends there was insufficient evidence for the jury to find she aided and abetted the robbery. We affirm. BACKGROUND The facts underlying the residential burglary conviction are irrelevant to the issue on appeal. We summarize the facts underlying the robbery conviction only. On April 8, 2014, defendant and Vanessa Shea had been hanging out for a couple of hours at a friend’s house when they decided to go to Rite Aid to get some liquor. The two had hung out together in the past. After failing in their attempt to gather enough money to purchase the liquor they, nonetheless, walked to Rite Aid with the intent of stealing it. Shea took a bottle of vodka off the shelf, handed it to defendant, and defendant put it in her purse. The two then left the store together without stopping at the cashier to pay for the vodka. When defendant and Shea left the store, the security device affixed to the bottle of alcohol set off the store’s audio alarm. The two women kept walking. The store’s asset protection agent, Luke McCluskey, witnessed Shea take the bottle off the shelf, saw defendant put it in her purse, and saw the two leaving the store. When the alarm sounded, he followed them out of the store and, approaching Shea, identified himself. Defendant kept walking away, walking quickly. Shea turned around and pulled out a gun from her waistband. By the time McCluskey pulled out his cell phone to call 911, defendant, who continued walking, was approaching a nearby storefront. Shea began waving the gun and stated to McCluskey, “You better get off your phone if you know what’s good for you.” McCluskey put his phone away, turned around, and went back into the Rite Aid store. Shea met up with defendant across the street and the two walked back to their friend’s house together.
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)