People v. Johnson CA2/2

Filed 6/30/16 P. v. Johnson CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 TWO

THE PEOPLE, B259882

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. MA055727) v.

TIMOTHY JERODE JOHNSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Kathleen Blanchard, Judge. Affirmed as modified.

David Y. Stanley, 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, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, and Robert M. Snider, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ******

Timothy Jerode Johnson (defendant) was convicted of murder and two counts of robbery, and sentenced to two terms of life without possibility of parole. On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred in giving CALJIC No. 2.11.5, in doubling his sentence of life without possibility of parole under the Three Strikes law (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (b)-(j) & 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d))1, in imposing a parole revocation fine, and in noting on the abstract of judgment that the stayed sentences for the robbery counts were to run consecutively. Defendant’s last two arguments have merit; his first two do not. We accordingly affirm his conviction and sentence, but order that the judgment be modified to correct errors in the abstract of judgment. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND I. Facts In March 2012, defendant’s girlfriend drove him to a strip mall in Lancaster, California, so he could rob a computer store in that mall. She was to be his getaway driver. As she waited in the parking lot, defendant entered a computer store called E- Chaps. When he entered the store, he pulled a ski mask down over his face and trained a gun on the store’s owner and one of the owner’s friends. He announced, “This is a robbery” and ordered both men to the floor. The friend complied; the store owner argued with defendant. Defendant warned that he would shoot the owner if he did not drop to the floor. When the owner still did not comply, defendant shot him twice; said, “You didn’t think I’d shoot you, did you?”; and shot him two more times. Defendant took the friend’s car keys and cell phone, and told him, “Now I have to kill you, too. I can’t leave a witness.” However, while defendant was busy placing laptop computers into his backpack and suitcase, the friend dashed for the front door and got away. Defendant ran back to his girlfriend’s waiting car, and yelled for her to “drive.” They sped away.