People v. Alford CA2/6
Filed 7/26/22 P. v. Alford CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SIX
THE PEOPLE, 2d Crim. No. B312837 (Super. Ct. No. 20F-02462) Plaintiff and Respondent, (San Luis Obispo County)
v.
MARIO S. ALFORD,
Defendant and Appellant.
Mario S. Alford appeals from the judgment after the jury convicted him of robbery (Pen. Code,1 § 211) and found true the allegation that he personally used a firearm (§ 12022.53, subd. (b)). The trial court found true the allegations that he had multiple serious prior convictions (§ 667, subd. (a)) and two “strike” convictions. (§§ 667, subds. (d), (e); 1170.12, subds. (b), (c).) It sentenced him to 25 years to life in state prison for robbery as a third striker; plus 10 years for the firearm
1 Further unspecified statutory references are to the Penal Code.
enhancement; plus 10 years for two prior serious felony convictions. Appellant contends that the firearm enhancement must be reversed because the trial court erred in answering the jury’s question. We affirm.2 FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY In November 2019, the manager of a Check Into Cash (a check cashing store) saw appellant standing close behind her at the counter. He was wearing a wig and a jumpsuit. He pointed a gun at the manager’s side and told her to go to the safe. She told him she could not open the safe because it was on a timer, but she said there was cash in the front register. Appellant bound the manager’s face, legs, and wrists with duct tape. He told her not to “look up or go out [of the room]” or “somebody will get mad.” The manager saw him take money from the front register, later determined to be $2,122. In a photo show-up, the manager recognized codefendant Race Flowers as a previous customer at Check Into Cash. She stated that Flowers was not the person who pointed a gun at her and took the money. Another witness identified Flowers in a photo show-up as one of two people she saw walking together toward Check Into Cash around the time of robbery.
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)