People v. Mitchell

Full title: THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. TAVARON DONTA MITCHELL et al.…

Court: California Court of Appeals, Second District, Third Division

Date published: Jul 27, 2011

No. B223657 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 27, 2011)

Opinion

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. TAVARON DONTA MITCHELL et al., Defendants and Appellants. B223657 California Court of Appeal, Second District, Third Division July 27, 2011

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. NA078591

ORDER MODIFYING OPINION AND DENYING REHEARING

THE COURT:

It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on July 15, 2011, be modified as follows:

1. On page 8, at lines 2 and 3, the word “burglary” is changed to the word “theft” so the relevant sentence reads:

“Defendants contend the trial court was required to instruct the jury, sua sponte, on conspiracy to commit theft because there was substantial evidence tending to show the intended crime was theft rather than robbery.”

2. On page 9, at lines 9 and 12, the word “burglary” is changed to the word “theft” so the relevant sentence reads:

“In sum, the evidence at trial provided substantial evidence the intended crime was theft, not robbery. Although the jurors need not have believed Bourgeois’s testimony, their instructions should have enabled them to give it due consideration by offering them the alternative verdict of conspiracy to commit theft.”

There is no change in the judgment.

Respondent’s petition for rehearing is denied.