People v. Joseph CA3

Filed 5/22/22 P. v. Joseph CA3 Opinion following transfer from Supreme Court NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (San Joaquin) ----

THE PEOPLE, C093949

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. STKCRFE20190008971) v.

TINISHA NATE JOSEPH,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Tinisha Nate Joseph was found guilty by a jury of felony hit and run. Defendant appeals and contends: (1) insufficient evidence demonstrated she knew or should have known she injured a person in the accident; and (2) the court prejudicially erred in instructing the jury on mistake of law. The People concede it was error for the court to instruct the jury on mistake of law (CALCRIM No. 3407), but argue any error was harmless. We agree with the People and affirm.

1

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND At approximately 10:00 p.m. on a February night, B. Z., a six-foot tall and 220- pound man, was riding his bicycle when he was hit by defendant’s car. He flew in the air, landed in the road, and was run over by a second vehicle, causing his death. The accident was seen by another motorist. That motorist saw B. Z. standing at the corner of an intersection with his bike and saw defendant make a left turn through that intersection traveling about 20 miles an hour. The motorist heard a “smack” and, when she looked through her rearview mirror, she saw a person fly into the air. She also saw a car -- roughly fitting the description of defendant’s car -- stop for a few seconds, and then continue away from the accident. Soon after, a tow truck driver saw B. Z. in the street and saw a mid-sized, four-door sedan run over him. The tow truck driver saw the sedan “flip up in the air and go back down, and the next thing [he] saw was a person laying in the road.” During the investigation, Stockton Police Officer Derek Braga found parts of a red bicycle and B. Z.’s personal effects strewn across the intersection and saw a large pool of blood in the middle lane of the road. Officer Braga also found the license plate from defendant’s car. Upon seizure of the car, Officer Braga saw damage to its front bumper “just off of the front center,” damage to the lower grille and driver’s side hood, as well as dents to the driver’s side A-pillar. Officer Braga discovered red paint from B. Z.’s bicycle on the car’s fog-light and on the front left-side bumper. Officer Braga was of the opinion that the initial location of impact was the driver’s side hood. Officer Braga further determined B. Z. was at fault for the accident because he rode his bicycle across lanes of traffic in violation of law. Defendant testified in her own defense. She claimed that, as she turned through the intersection, she heard a loud sound, like a “bomb,” but since it was “completely dark,” she could not see anything around her. After the accident, defendant drove approximately 500 feet and stopped in a parking lot with lighting. In the parking lot, she