People v. Bell CA2/3

Filed 2/18/21 P. v. Bell CA2/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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(a). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115(a).

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE, B305103

Plaintiff and Respondent, Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. YA098886 v.

KENNETH EUGENE BELL,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Alan B. Honeycutt, Judge. Affirmed. Kristin Traicoff, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Paul M. Roadarmel, Jr. and Eric J. Kohm, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

INTRODUCTION

Defendant Kenneth Eugene Bell was convicted of simple assault committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang. On appeal, he argues that during jury selection, the prosecutor unconstitutionally discriminated on the basis of race by using two of her five peremptory challenges to strike Black women from the panel. We affirm.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND1

By information filed April 26, 2019, defendant was charged with one count of assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code,2 § 245, subd. (a)(1); count 3), in which he personally inflicted great bodily injury (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)), committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(B)).3 The information also alleged defendant had been convicted of four prior felonies that constituted strike priors (§§ 667, subds. (b)–(j), 1170.12), serious-felony priors (§ 667, subd. (a)(1)), and prison priors (§ 667, subd. (b)). Defendant pled not guilty and denied the allegations. After a bifurcated trial at which he did not testify, defendant was found not guilty of count 3 but guilty of the lesser- included offense of simple assault (§ 240). The jury found the gang allegation (§ 186.22, subd. (a)) true. Defendant waived his right to a jury trial on the prior convictions and later admitted them.