California Court of Appeal

Conviction of defendant for first degree murder under the felony murder rule is affirmed where: 1) it was not unreasonable for the jury to conclude the homicide and the burglary were part of one continuous transaction, inasmuch as defendant was in flight from the scene with his license plates secreted; 2) defendant's argument that the trial court erred in refusing his request to instruct the jury pursuant to CALCRIM No. 3261 is rejected as, the Supreme Court has held that instruction on the "continuous-transaction" doctrine is sufficient to inform the jury on the duration of a felony for purposes of the felony-murder rule and that the escape rule, which terminates a felony at the point the perpetrator reaches a place of temporary safety, defines the scope of an underlying felony for certain ancillary purposes and not for felony-murder purposes; and 3) given defendant's record and described by the seasoned judge as "chilling," as well as the fact that the jury found defendant guilty of first degree murder, defendant's argument that the 25 years to life sentence imposed is cruel and unusual is rejected.

Appellate Information

• Decided 01/07/2011
• Published 01/07/2011

Judges

• MOORE

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Sharon M. Jones, Edmund G. Brown, Jr.