From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Curry

California Court of Appeals, Third District, Sacramento
Jan 22, 2008
No. C052801 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 22, 2008)

Opinion


THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DWAYNE MICHAEL CURRY et al., Defendants and Appellants. C052801 California Court of Appeal, Third District, Sacramento January 22, 2008

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sacramento County No. 05F00798. Cheryl Meegan, J.

Rebecca P. Jones, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant Titenesha Russell; Hilda Scheib, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant Terry Buford; Janice M. Lagerlof, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant Dwayne Curry.

Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Daniel B. Bernstein, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

ORDER MODIFYING OPINION AND DENYING REHEARING

SIMS, P.J.

THE COURT:

It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on December 31, 2007, be modified as follows:

1. On page 6, lines 4 and 5 of the third full paragraph, the word “cross-examination” is deleted, and the words “redirect examination” are inserted in its place.

2. On page 6, lines 5 and 6 of the third full paragraph, the phrase “Buford brought up the money while she and Curry were going through her clothes” is deleted, and the phrase “Buford and Curry were looking for the $700 when Curry pulled L.R.’s clothes off.”

3. On page 14, line 1 of the second full paragraph, the first word “Russell” is deleted and the word “Boone” is inserted in its place.

4. On page 14, line 1 of the second full paragraph, the word “cross-examination” is deleted and the words “redirect examination” are inserted in its place.

5. On page 14, lines 1 and 2 of the second full paragraph and continuing to page 15, the phrase “Buford mentioned the $700 when she and Curry were going through L.R.’s clothing at the park” is deleted, and the phrase “Buford and Curry were looking for the $700 when Curry pulled L.R.’s clothes off at the park” is inserted in its place.

This modification does not constitute a change in the judgment. Appellant Russell’s petition for rehearing is denied.

HULL, J., CANTIL-SAKAUYE, J.


Summaries of

People v. Curry

California Court of Appeals, Third District, Sacramento
Jan 22, 2008
No. C052801 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 22, 2008)
Case details for

People v. Curry

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DWAYNE MICHAEL CURRY et al.…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Third District, Sacramento

Date published: Jan 22, 2008

Citations

No. C052801 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 22, 2008)