P. v. Hebrard CA2/4
Filed 4/24/13 P. v. Hebrard CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOUR
THE PEOPLE, B239269
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA377622) v.
LEANDRE HEBRARD,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Robert J. Schuit, Judge. Affirmed. Sarah A. Stockwell, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Assistant Attorney General, Steven D. Matthews and David E. Madeo, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
________________________________
INTRODUCTION LeAndre Hebrard appeals from his conviction, following a jury trial, of second degree robbery. He contends (1) the trial court erred in allowing a gang expert to testify about gang members leaving a gang, (2) there was insufficient evidence to support the gang enhancements, and (3) the court erred in sentencing him to separate consecutive terms for the firearm and gang enhancements. Finding no error, we affirm. STATEMENT OF THE CASE 1 A jury found appellant guilty of second degree robbery (Pen. Code, § 211). It found true the allegation that appellant personally used a firearm to commit the robbery (§ 12022.53, subd. (b)), that a principal was armed with a firearm (§ 12022, subd. (a)(1)), and that the crime was committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang with the intent to promote, further, and assist the gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)). The trial court sentenced appellant to a total of 23 years in prison, consisting of the midterm of three years for the robbery conviction, plus 10 years consecutive for the personal use firearm enhancement, and 10 years consecutive for the gang enhancement. The one-year firearm enhancement under section 12022, subdivision (a)(1) was imposed and stayed, pursuant to section 654. Appellant timely appealed. STATEMENT OF THE FACTS In October 2010, Kristopher Sallico owned and operated Jimmy’s Cleaners on Martin Luther King Boulevard in Los Angeles. Sallico testified that on October 27, 2010, at around 2:00 p.m., he was robbed by appellant and codefendant Andre
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)